DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II

Udyog Sadan, C-22 & 23, Qutub Institutional Area

(Behind Qutub Hotel), New Delhi-110016

Case No.188/2016

Sh. Manmohan Singh                                         (Senior Citizen)

S/o Late Sh. Manohar Singh                               

R/o JE-19, Flat No.5, 2^nd Floor,

Khirki Extension, Malviya Nagar,

New Delhi-110017

….Complainant

Versus

1.      Managing Director

          Samsung Electronics India Pvt. Ltd.

          A-25, Ground Floor, Front Tower,

          Mohan Co-operative Estate,

          New Delhi-110024

2.      Sh.  Sanjay Bakshi (Proprietor)

          MGE Zone, 6, DAV, School Building,

          Yousuf Sarai, New Delhi-110016

….Opposite Parties

                                                  Date of Institution      :  15.06.2016       Date of Order                :  28.10.2017

Coram:

Sh. N.K. Goel, President

Ms. Naina Bakshi, Member

ORDER

Briefly stated, the complainant bought a refrigerator, Samsung make (ref. RT 27 JARMABX) on 06.07.15 from OP No.2 by paying Rs.21,000/- which was delivered at his residence on 06.07.15. The fridge started giving problems after 3 months of its delivery. The complainant approached the OP No.2 and made a complaint regarding cooling problem with the OP No.2. The representative of OP No.2 Mr. Sunil promised him that they will take care of the complaint as the complainant is handicapped. The mechanic Mr. Wasim from OP No.1 visited his residence and fixed the problem but again in the month of December, 2015 there was a cooling problem and water leakage from the refrigerator. Once again, the complainant complained to the OP No.2 but the complaint was not attended properly. Once again Mr. Wasim attended the complaint and the problem was fixed.  It is submitted that on 9^th April, 2016 and 25^th May, 2016 the complainant registered the complaints with OP No.1 but nothing has been done so far as the water leakage problem is concerned. As the OPs have not replied till today and the complainant is a handicapped and a senior citizen unable to visit again and again to the OPs he faced mental tension, physical harassment by visiting the OPs.  The complainant has prayed that the OPs be directed to pay Rs.21,000/- and to take back the refrigerator and to pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation for  mental torture, harassment and mental strain etc.

 OP No.1 in the written statement has inter-alia stated that the complainant had purchased a Samsung refrigerator (Ref. RT 27JARMABX) on 06.07.15 from OP No.1 in good condition and having full satisfaction with the said product.  In case the product is damaged or the warranty terms are violated, then the warranty shall be void and the product can only be repaired on chargeable basis paid by the customer. The OP No.1 is always ready to resolve the problem as per the terms of the warranty entitlement.  The OP No.1 has taken best possible method to resolve the present complaint but the complainant was adamant to be compensated by abusing the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act. The complainant is guilty of “suggestio falsi” and “suppresstio veri" inasmuch as the complainant has deliberately concealed various material facts from this forum and hence the complaint is liable to be dismissed.  It is submitted that the complainant adamantly demanded refund of the said refrigerator which was denied by the OP No.2 who was also approached by the complainant and the issue is resolved by the service provider. Hence, it clearly proves that the said refrigerator is working fine. It is clear that the refrigerator can be repaired but the complainant was not ready to get the same repaired. It is submitted that the OP No.1 is still ready to repair the refrigerator of the complainant as per the warranty terms and conditions and had always duly attended the problems raised by the complainant and the OPs are diligent in providing their services. The OP No.1 has prayed for dismissal of the complaint with cost.

No written statement has been filed on behalf of the OP No.2.

No rejoinder has been filed on behalf of the complainant.

Complainant has filed an affidavit in the shape of reply. Affidavit of Sh. Anindya Bose, AR of the OP No.1 has been filed in evidence on behalf of the OP No.1.

Written arguments have been filed on behalf of the OP No.1.

We have heard the oral arguments of the complainant and counsel for the OP No.1 and have also gone through the file very carefully.

The complainant has filed copy of a retail invoice dated 06.07.15 for an amount of Rs.21,000/- for purchasing the Samsung refrigerator Ref. RT 27 JARMABAX.  We mark the invoice as Mark A for the purposes of identification.  It is clear from the documents filed by the parties that the complainant has not filed any job sheet regarding defects in the refrigerator. No manufacturing defect had been pleaded in the complaint.  The OP No.1 in the written statement has stated that they are still ready to repair the refrigerator of the complainant as per the warranty terms and conditions but the complainant has refused to get the same repaired. The complainant turned down this offer of OP No.1 before this Forum on 03.01.17. Therefore, the complainant has failed to prove any deficiency in service on the part of the OPs. Accordingly, we dismiss the complaint with no order as to costs.

Let a copy of this order be sent to the parties as per regulation 21 of the Consumer Protection Regulations.  Thereafter file be consigned to record room.

Announced on 28.10.2017.