Chandigarh

DF-I

CC/205/2020

Ravinder Kaur - Complainant(s)

Versus

LG Electronics India Pvt. Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Maninder Arora, VP Arora

07 Jun 2021

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION-I,

U.T. CHANDIGARH

                                                    ========

 

                                     

Consumer Complaint No.	:	CC/205/2020
Date of Institution	:	09/07/2020
Date of Decision	:	07/06/2021

 

Ravinder Kaur W/o Sh. Harinder Singh S/o Jagdev Singh, R/o H.No.653, G.F., Sector 38-A, Chandigarh.

 

…..Complainant

 

V E R S U S

 

1.      L.G. Electronics India Pvt. Ltd., Plot No.194-195, 2^nd Floor, Industrial Area, Phase-II, Chandigarh, through its Branch Manager.

 

2.      L.G. Direct Service Centre, 1^st Floor, Plot No. 57, Industrial and Business Park-I, Chandigarh – 160002, through its Branch Incharge.

…… Opposite Parties

QUORUM:	SURJEET KAUR	PRESIDING MEMBER
	SURESH KUMAR SARDANA	MEMBER

                                                                       

PRESENT:	:	Sh. Maninder Arora, Counsel for Complainant.
	:	Sh. Arjun Grover, Counsel for Opposite Parties.

 

Per Suresh Kumar Sardana, Member

 

1.         Adumbrated in brief, the facts necessary for the disposal of the instant Consumer Complaint are, the Complainant purchased a L.G. refrigerator from M/s Ahuja Electronics, SCO 2406, Sector 22-C, Chandigarh on 25.06.2018 for an amount of `53,000/- (Annexure C-1). The Complainant also paid an additional amount of `6,962/- to Opposite Parties vide invoice dated 30.06.2018 whereby the warranty of said refrigerator was extended for the period of three years with AMC issued by Opposite Party No.1 as per Annexure C-2. In the month of March 2020 the Complainant was diagnosed with breast cancer and her treatment is going on till date before the PGIMER, Chandigarh (Annexure C-3). In May, 2020 the refrigerator started giving problems and it was not cooling for which Complaint was given to Opposite Party on 09.05.2020 vide RNP No. 200510011723. Then thereafter an Engineer visited who somehow made the refrigerator operational, but again after few days the refrigerator stopped working for which another Complaint was raised vide RNP No.20058099606 on 28.05.2020. This time, another Engineer visited and said that there is some problem with its software and tried to make it operational, but all in vain. He however temporarily started the refrigerator, but again it stopped working within 2-3 days. The Complainant again made a Complaint vide RNP No. 200604070098 on 04.06.2020, but the same remained unattended by the Opposite Parties inspite of repeated calls and messages dated 28.06.2020 and e-mails (Annexure C-4). Since the refrigerator was of utmost importance for the treatment of the Complainant, therefore, the husband of the Complainant had to purchase new refrigerator on 03.07.2020 and had incurred the amount of `11,500/- (Annexure C-5).    Hence, the present consumer complaint.
2.         Notice of the complaint was sent to Opposite Parties seeking their version of the case.
3.         Opposite Parties No.1 & 2 contested the Complaint and filed their joint written statement, inter alia, admitting the basic facts of the case. It has been pleaded that the Complainant purchased the refrigerator in question on 25.06.2018 and also took an AMC dated 30.06.2018 for additional 02 years making it to 03 years warranty in toto. After usage of the product for almost 02 years, the Complainant on 10.05.2020, for the first time, lodged a Complaint for some cooling issue in the product and after making minor adjustments including defrost cleaning free of cost the product was functioning properly. Thereafter, the Complainant on 28.05.2020 once again lodged a Complaint regarding some issue in the product and this time the duct was cleaned by the Service Engineer and the defrost system was also explained to the Complainant. On 04.06.2020, the Complainant on again lodged a Complaint regarding some issue in the product. On his visit the Service Engineer found that duct assembly needs replacement which was accordingly replaced with new one on 10.07.2020 and thereafter, the product functioned properly as thereafter no call has been registered by the Complainant with the Opposite Parties regarding any issue in the product. Pleading that there was no deficiency in service on their part, a prayer has been made for dismissal of the complaint.
4.         The complainant has filed replication, wherein he has reiterated all the averments, contained in the complaint, and repudiated those, contained in the written version of Opposite Parties No.1 & 2.
5.         Parties were permitted to place their respective evidence on record, in support of their contentions.
6.         We have gone through the entire record, along with the written arguments advanced by both the sides and heard the arguments addressed by the Ld. Counsel for Parties.
7.         The purchase of the refrigerator in question and taking of the AMC for additional two years by the Complainant has not been disputed by the Opposite Parties. Perusal of the job-sheets placed on record by the Opposite Parties clearly reveals that the refrigerator worked approximately for almost two years without any fault.
8.         There is no dispute about the fact that the Complainant lodged first Complaint on 10.05.2020, when on inspection minor adjustments were made and defrost cleaning was also done. The second complainant was lodged on 28.05.2020, which was duly attended to and the duct was cleaned and defrost system was explained to the Complainant. Eventually, on 04.06.2020 when the Complainant lodged Complaint with the Opposite Parties, the duct assembly was replaced with the new one on 10.07.2020, whereafter the refrigerator functioned perfectly as there is nothing on record to show that the Complainant ever made any complaints with the Opposite Parties regarding any issue in the product.
9.         It is the categorical case of the Complainant that owing to the deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties, her husband had to purchase new refrigerator on 03.07.2020 as her medicines, groceries etc. started going awry and were becoming non-consumable. Here, it is pertinent to add that pursuant to the last Complaint lodged by the Complainant on 04.06.2020, the Service Engineer who inspected the refrigerator found that the duct assembly needs its replacement. Since at that relevant time, the entire nation had been working in a restricted manner due to the unprecedented times of Covid-19 pandemic, the Opposite Parties replaced the duct assembly on 10.07.2020; whereas, the present Complaint was filed on 23.07.2020. In this view of the matter, if the Complainant purchased a new refrigerator, the Opposite Parties cannot be held liable, in as much as, it was the sole prerogative of the Complainant either to wait for the part (duct assembly) or to purchase a new refrigerator. Be that as it may, the Complainant did not wait for the duct assembly to arrive, but chose to purchase the new refrigerator in view of her needs and not on account of any deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties. Needless to mention that the COVID-19 pandemic has affected the supply and demand for both new appliances and repairs and parts for those appliances.        
10.         At any rate, the onus to prove that the Refrigerator was having manufacturing defect lies on the Complainant. However, the Complainant has miserably failed to adduce any cogent, convincing and reliable documentary evidence, much less any technical report/opinion from any expert, to substantiate her claim that the Refrigerator was suffering from some inherent manufacturing defect which cannot be rectified. In the absence of which, the assertions made by the Complainant are bald and thus, cannot be believed.         
11.         Taking into consideration all the facts and circumstances of the case, we have no hesitation to hold that the Complainant has failed to prove that there has been any deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties or that the Opposite Parties adopted any unfair trade practice. As such, the Complaint is devoid of any merit and the same is hereby dismissed, leaving the parties to bear their own costs.
12.         Certified copy of this order be communicated to the parties, free of charge. After compliance file be consigned to record room.

Announced

07^th June, 2021

                        Sd/-

 (SURJEET KAUR)

PRESIDING MEMBER

 

 

Sd/-

 (SURESH KUMAR SARDANA)

MEMBER

 “Dutt”