IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ALAPPUZHA
Saturday the 30th day of July, 2016.
Filed on 25.09.2015
Present
- Smt. Elizabeth George (President)
- Sri. Antony Xavier (Member)
- Smt. Jasmine D (Member)
in
C.C.No.284/2015
between
Complainant:- Opposite Parties:-
Sri T. M. Thomas 1. Lloyd Electronic & Engineering Ltd.
Thottathil, South Aryad 159, Okhla Industrial Estate
Avalookunnu P. O. Phase III, New Delhi – 110020
Alappuzha – 688006 (By Adv. Lijo. P.)
2. Goodmorning Enterprises
Ababeel Complex
Near Stone Bridge,
CCSB Road, Alappuzha - 688001
O R D E R
SMT. JASMINE D. (MEMBER)
The case of the complainant in short is as follows:-
The complainant purchased an Air Conditioner from the 2nd opposite party manufactured by the 1st opposite party for an amount of Rs.20,000/- on 14.01.2015. The opposite parties assured 2 years warranty for the product at the time of purchase. The complainant purchased the AC for using the same in his House boat. During the warranty period the product became defective on 5.9.2015 and the opposite parties has replaced the compressor and condenser of the AC but it became again functionless and the complainant has intimated to the opposite parties about the defect but the defect has not been repaired. The complainant sustained much mental agony and inconvenience and hence filed this complaint.
2. Notices were served to the opposite parties. 1st opposite party appeared before the Forum and filed version. 2nd opposite party appeared before the Forum, but did not file any version and also absent for the subsequent proceedings, hence 2nd opposite party was set ex-parte.
3. Version of the opposite party is as follows:-
The complainant is not maintainable. It is true that the complainant was purchased an AC on 14.01.2015. The said Split AC is meant to use only in house and office. The complainant purchased the product to use in his house boat. The allegation of the complainant that the opposite party has replaced the compressor and condenser of the AC is false and hence denied. The opposite party has issued the perfect product to the complainant has not adduced any evidence in contrary. Hence the complaint may be dismissed with the cost of the opposite party.
4. The complainant was examined as PW1 and documents Ext.A1 to A2 were marked. Considering the allegation of the complainant and contentions of the 1st opposite party the Forum has raised the following issues for consideration.
1) Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties?
2) Whether the complainant is entitled to get a relief so far?
5. Issues 1 & 2
The case of the complainant is that he had purchased an AC from the 2nd opposite party manufactured by the 1st opposite party for an amount of Rs.20,000/- on 14.1.2015. The opposite parties assured 2 years warranty for the product. During the warranty period the product became defective and the defect was intimated to the opposite parties. But the product has not been repaired or replaced so far and this cause much mental agony to the complainant and hence filed this complaint alleging the deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties.
6. Complainant was examined as PW1 and documents Ext.A1 to A2 were marked. Ext.A1 is the cash retail invoice dated 14.1.2015. Ext.A2 is the details of complaints registered. From the documents it is clear that the complainant has purchased an AC manufactured by the 1st opposite party and the product became defective during the warranty period even though the defect was intimated to the 1st opposite party many times the defect was not yet cured. The documents produced would show that the case of the complainant is genuine. Even though the defect was brought to the notice of the opposite parties they have not made any earnest effort to rectify the defect or to replace the product. Therefore the opposite party has committed the deficiency in service. 1st opposite party appeared before the Forum and expressed their willingness to settle the matter by replacing the AC on 2.11.2015. Complainant also agreed for the same. But the opposite party failed to replace the AC till date. So the complainant is entitled to get refund of the price of the AC together with the compensation and cost. The opposite parties are jointly or severally liable for that.
In the result the complaint is allowed. The opposite parties are jointly or severally directed to refund the price of the AC Rs.20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand) to the complainant and the complainant is directed to return the defective AC simultaneously. The opposite parties are further directed to pay an amount of Rs.2,000/- (two thousand) compensation and Rs.1,000/- (one thousand) towards cost of the proceedings. The order shall be complied within one month from the date of the order failing which the amount Rs.20,000/- shall carry interest at the rate of 10% from the date of Order till realization.
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant transcribed by her, corrected and pronounced by me in open Forum on this the 30th day of July, 2016.
Sd/- Smt. Jasmine D (Member) :
Sd/- Smt. Elizabeth George (President) :
Sd/- Sri. Antony Xavier (Member) :
Appendix:-
Evidence of the complainant
PW1 - Thomas (Witness)
Ext.A1 - Cash retail invoice dated 14.01.2015
Ext.A2 - Details of complaint registered
Evidence of the opposite parties:- Nil
//True copy//
By Order
Senior Superintendent
To
Complainant/Opposite parties/SF.
Typed by: -Pj/-
Compared by:-
