DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BATHINDA.
CC.No.277 of 10-07-2013
Decided on 24-10-2013
Ashok Kumar aged about 40 years S/o Chaman Lal R/o Arya School Road, Rampura Phul, Tehsil Phul, District Bathinda.
........Complainant
Versus
1.M/s Samsung Electronics Pvt. Ltd., Head Office Sector 31, Gurgaon (Haryana), through its Managing Director.
2.M/s Laxmi Electronics near OBC Bank, Main Chowk, Rampura Phul, through its Proprietor/Manager/Partner.
3.M/s Home Care Service Centre, Bhatti Road, near Pragma Hospital, Bathinda, through its Proprietor.
.......Opposite parties
Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
QUORUM
Smt.Vikramjit Kaur Soni, President.
Sh.Amarjeet Paul, Member.
Smt.Sukhwinder Kaur, Member.
Present:-
For the Complainant: Sh.Rajesh Bansal, counsel for the complainant.
For Opposite parties: Sh.Kuljit Pal Sharma, counsel for the opposite party Nos.1 and 3.
Opposite party No.2 ex-parte.
ORDER
VIKRAMJIT KAUR SONI, PRESIDENT:-
1. The complainant has filed the present complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 as amended upto date (Here-in-after referred to as an 'Act'). The brief facts of the complaint are that the complainant has purchased one Samsung refrigerator RT2934NBSP, R3514PA700084D on 15.8.2012 vide bill/invoice No.1598 dated 15.8.2012 for Rs.23,000/- from the opposite party No.2 with one year guarantee. The complainant started using the abovesaid refrigerator as per the instructions and guidelines of the opposite parties but since its purchase, the abovesaid refrigerator started giving problems as it was not giving the proper cooling (freezing of ice). The complainant made complaints vide No.8452808522 as well as on 24.4.2013, 29.4.2013, 1.5.2013, 17.5.2013 and 30.5.2013. The opposite party No.3 once came and replaced the compressor, but the problem is still there and its mechanic stated that there is some manufacturing defect. The complainant made several visits and telephone calls, but to no purpose and his family had to suffer a lot in the scorching heat as they had to go to other's house to get ice. The complainant has also got served a legal notice on dated 8.6.2013. Despite repeated requests the opposite parties have failed to pay any heed to the requests of the complainant. Hence the complainant has filed the present complaint to seek the directions to the opposite parties to produce the entire record regarding the abovesaid refrigerator and its service and to replace the defective refrigerator alongwith cost and compensation.
2. Notice was sent to the opposite parties. The opposite party Nos.1 and 3 after appearing before this Forum has filed their joint written statement and pleaded that the actual facts of the complaint are that the complainant lodged a complaint regarding the abovesaid refrigerator and they got replaced the compressor of the abovesaid refrigerator free of cost and it started working properly as it was OK in all respects. The complainant again lodged a complaint with the opposite parties and they duly attended his complaints and sent their mechanics/service engineer and the mechanics/service engineer found that the abovesaid refrigerator was working properly, but the complainant deliberately has not signed the job sheets. The opposite party No.2 kept the abovesaid refrigerator in its home for try and it was working properly and there was no defect in the abovesaid refrigerator, as such there is no fault on the part of the opposite parties. The opposite party No.1 is the manufacturer, the opposite party No.2 is dealer and the opposite party No.3 is the service centre of Samsung Electronics. There is no allurement on the part of the opposite parties. The complainant has purchased the abovesaid refrigerator with his own free will. As the abovesaid refrigerator was within the warranty period, accordingly its compressor was replaced free of cost.
3. Registered notice has been sent to the opposite party No.2 on dated 30.7.2013 vide postal receipt No.A RP276435250IN but none appeared on behalf of the opposite party No.2 before this Forum despite receiving the summons, hence ex-parte proceedings are taken against the opposite party No.2.
4. The parties have led their evidence in support of their respective pleadings.
5. Arguments heard. The record alongwith written submissions submitted by the parties perused.
6. Admitted facts of the parties are that the complainant has purchased one Samsung refrigerator RT2934NBSP, R3514PA700084D on 15.8.2012 vide bill/invoice No.1598 dated 15.8.2012 for Rs.23,000/- from the opposite party No.2 with one year guarantee. The opposite party Nos.1 and 3 admitted the fact that once the compressor of the abovesaid refrigerator has been replaced free of cost.
7. The disputed facts are that the complainant started using the abovesaid refrigerator but it started giving the problems as it was not giving proper cooling (freezing the ice). The complainant made complaints vide No.8452808522 as well as on 24.4.2013, 29.4.2013, 1.5.2013, 17.5.2013 and 30.5.2013. After the replacement of the compressor the abovesaid refrigerator was again stopped working. The complainant lodged the complaint but no heed was paid to his request, whereas on the other hand the opposite party Nos.1 and 3 submitted that the complainant lodged a complaint regarding the abovesaid refrigerator and they got replaced its compressor free of cost and it started working properly as it was OK in all respects. The complainant again lodged a complaint with the opposite parties and they duly attended his complaint and sent their mechanics/service engineer and the mechanics/service engineer found that the abovesaid refrigerator was working properly, but the complainant has refused to sign the job sheets. The opposite party No.2 kept the abovesaid refrigerator in its home for try and it was working properly and there was not defect in it.
8. The customer details-cum-warranty card, Ex.C4, shows the serial No.RT2934NBSP/2012, R3514PAC700084D and compressor was replaced. The bill dated 15.8.2012, Ex.OP3/3, bears serial No.R3514PAC700084D which tally with the refrigerator whose compressor has been replaced. Moreover the problem in the abovesaid refrigerator has occurred after eight months approximately from the date of purchase i.e. till 28.4.2013 there was no problem in the abovesaid refrigerator, meaning thereby the same was working properly. The defect if any has occurred on 28.4.2013 and the same has duly been rectified by the opposite party No.3 by replacing the compressor of the abovesaid refrigerator. Moreover the working of the abovesaid refrigerator for 8 continuous months show that there is no inherent manufacturing defect in it. The complainant was entitled for repair that has already been done.
9. Thus from the facts, circumstances and evidence placed on file it is clear that there is no evidence produced by the complainant on file to prove that after the replacement of the compressor, the abovesaid refrigerator was not working properly. The complainant has sent a legal notice to the opposite parties on 8.6.2013 after 2 months of replacing the compressor of the abovesaid refrigerator which means the abovesaid refrigerator was working properly. There may be some minor defect in the abovesaid refrigerator. Hence the complaint is partly accepted with Rs.1000/- as cost and compensation against the opposite party Nos.1 and 3 and dismissed qua the opposite party No.2. The opposite party Nos.1 and 3 are directed to rectify the aforesaid problem of cooling in the abovesaid refrigerator. In case the cooling problem be not rectified by the opposite party No.3, the compressor of the abovesaid refrigerator be replaced again by the opposite party No.3 free of cost with new one with fresh warranty.
10. The compliance of this order be done within 45 days from the date of receipt of the copy of this order.
11. A copy of this order be sent to the parties concerned free of cost and file be consigned to the record room.
Pronounced in open Forum
24-10-2013
(Vikramjit Kaur Soni)
President
(Amarjeet Paul)
Member
(Sukhwinder Kaur)
Member
