Aggrieved by the order dated 19.9.2014 in CC/15/2013 passed by the Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (in short, ‘the State Commission’), the second opposite party, namely, LG Electronics India Pvt. Ltd. preferred First Appeal under Section 19 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (in short, “the Act.”) By the impugned order, the State Commission has allowed the Complaint in part directing Opposite Parties 1 and 3, namely, Bajaj Electronics and M/s Unnati ICS Ltd. to pay an amount of Rs.4,00,000/- each and the Petitioner herein to pay an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- to the Complainant.

2.       The facts, in brief, are that the Complainant purchased an LG Air Conditioner 5NW2AF2 alongwith Unistab Voltage Stablizer US 4 KV from the first opposite party on 1.11.2010 for an amount of Rs.27,790/- for which he was given a warranty on the equipment and the same was installed in his residence. While so, on 20.8.2011, when the Complainant’s daughter had switched on the Air Conditioner (AC), a spark appeared in the stabilizer whereby she switched off the starter and the Complainant switched off the main switch of the flat. The AC caught fire giving rise to thick synthetic soot which spread to the entire flat and destroyed the furniture and fixtures such as TV set, laptop, kitchenware, clothes, books upholstery, interiors and other antiques. The Complainant and her daughter got asphyxiated by inhaling the synthetic soot and they suffered health complaints. It was averred that they had to reside in a nearby hotel for about two weeks and had to purchase all the new items. Fire personnel from the fire station had put off the fire. Complaint was also lodged in Banjara Hills Police Station. Complainant took pictures of the burnt items and sent them to the first opposite party through email dated 25.8.2011, 27.8.2011 and 31.8.2011. The first opposite party in its email dated 27.11.2018 admitted its liability. It was averred that the wiring was in perfect condition and no short circuit or tripping had taken place. Dy. G.M. of the third Opposite Party also inspected the premises. A Surveyor was deputed by the first Opposite Party, who inspected the flat on 5.10.2011, by which time the Complainant got most of the damaged portion of the flat repaired incurring an amount of Rs.60,83,000/- In view of the Surveyor’s report, the Complainant claimed an amount of Rs.13,00,000/- and sent emails dated 14.11.2011, 15.11,2011, 24.11.2012, 28.11.2011 & 30.11.2011 apart from several other requests and messages. The Complainant also pleaded that it was only on account of the defective Air Conditioner and stabilizer that the incident had occurred which had destroyed the flat, furniture and fixtures for which the Complainant sought an amount of Rs.60,83,000/- together with compensation for mental agony, interest and other costs.

3.       Since the first and third Opposite Parties which were held liable by the State Commission to pay an amount of Rs.4,00,000/- each have already paid the amounts and settled with the Complainant, we address ourselves only to the contentions raised by the Appellant herein.

4.       Learned counsel appearing for the Appellant vehemently contended that no liability can be fastened upon the manufacturer M/s LG Electronics since there is no specific averment in the Complaint that the fire occurred because of the defective Air Conditioner and drew our attention to para-2 of the Complaint in which it was pleaded that a spark was initially observed between Unistab Voltage Stablizer- LG Air Conditioner and thereafter the stabilizer and Air Conditioner caught fire. He further submitted that in the entire Complaint, there is no pleading that the Air Conditioner had any manufacturing defect or had led to the occurrence of the fire.

5.       Learned counsel for the Respondent/Complainant  submitted that the Air Conditioner was purchased alongwith the stabilizer and a bill was raised by the first Opposite Party for both the AC and the stabilizer and, in fact, it was recommended that the said stabilizer be purchased alongwith the LG AC and that the Complainant’s flat was destroyed to a large extent only because of the fire which occurred in the AC and, therefore, the State Commission has rightly awarded an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- to  be paid by the Appellant herein.

6.       It is an admitted fact that the fire occurred in the Complainant’s flat on 20.8.2011 at 11.30 pm, when initially a spark was seen in the stabilizer and thereafter in the AC. For better understanding of the case, the email dated 23.8.2011 issued by Unistab Voltage Stablizer is reproduced as under: -

  “VENKATESH MADUGULA<venkatesh,madugula@lge.com> Sat. Aug 27, 2011 at 4.24 PM

To:madhu.kamath2000@gmail.commadhu.kamath2000@gmail.            com contact us contactus@unistab.com

Cc:ychandra.sekhar@lge.com<ychandra.sekhar@lge.com, “DSCSUPERVISOR-AC@lgindia.com”

DSCSUPERVISOR-AR@lgindia.com

Dear Ms. Madhu Kamath,

First of all sorry for the inconvenience caused due to Stablizer, which was purchased from Bajaj Electronics, Punjagutta in Nov 2010.

As per our Dept. Manag Mr. Farooq Inspection report, LG Split AC (Indoor Unit) got burnt due to high voltage since stabilizer is having plastic body and placed below the indoor unit.

However, Mr. Murali-Manager from UNISTAB under discussion with their Higher official, he will be replying by Monday. Fyi.

Regard.”

(Emphasis supplied)

7.       It is evident from the said email that the reason for the LG split AC having got burnt is only due to high voltage and as the stabilizer having a plastic body was placed below the indoor unit, the mishap had occurred. A specific reasoning was given after an inspection was done by the department Manager Mr. Farooq. It is also seen from the record that there is no specific plea against the Appellant herein with respect to any manufacturing defect which might have initiated the fire and there is no documentary evidence on record to establish the contention of the Complainant. LG Air Conditioner had no role in either starting of the fire or any hastening of the spread of the fire. The inspection report had concluded that there was no problem with the Air Conditioner but with the stabilizer. It is relevant to mention that M/s Bajaj Electronics and M/s Unnati ICS Ltd. have settled the claim. At the cost of repetition, in the absence of any evidence on record that LG Air Conditioner had any role to play in the starting of the fire or in the damage that had subsequently occurred, we are of the considered view that fastening of liability on the appellant herein is unjustified. For all the above-noted reasons, this Appeal is allowed qua the Appellant and the order of the State Commissioner is set aside qua the Appellant. In the result, this appeal is allowed and the order of the State Commission is set aside qua the Appellant only.

8.       The statutory amount deposited, if any, stands transferred to the Legal Aid Account of this Commission with accrued interest.