Case No. 31/2021   

 IN THE MATTER OF

              Shivgati Fatima W/O Sri Parivesh Ahmad  R/O A-2 Yasin Home, Purani Chungi, AnoopShahar Road, Aligarh

                                           V/s

1. Manager Samsung India Electronices Pvt. Ltd. 20 to 24 floor 2 horizone Center Golf Course Sector 43 DLF Gurugram Hariyana
2. S. L. Arora Electronices Pvt. Ltd. Ghandhi Marg Dhapara Road opp. Canara Bank Railway Road, Aligarh by Prop.d            

CORAM

              Present:

1. Shri Hasnain Qureshi, President
2. Shri Alok Upadhyaya, Member
3. Smt. Purnima Singh Rajpoot, Member

  PRONOUNCED by Shri Hasnain Qureshi, President

JUDGMENT

1. The present complaint has been filed by the complainant before this commission for  the following reliefs-

1.   The Ops be directed to replace the fridge by the new fridge or to pay price of the fridge Rs.79000/.
2.  Expenses Rs.5000/ incurred by complainant be paid.
3.  Cost of the case Rs.10000/.
4. Compensation for harassment Rs.25000/.

2. It is stated that the complainant purchased a double door fridge from OP no.2 for Rs.79000/on 16.5.2018  which was not having cooling and fridging and complaint was made on 12.6.2018 on toll free no. of the company and thereafter complainant were made on 9.7.2018, 25.7.2018 13.8.2018,21.9.2018and on 25.11.2018. Complainant served notice dated 31.12.2018 through counsel to Op.
3.  Op no.1 submitted in WS that the allegation of cooling is false. OP no.2 is a dealer and has no authority to provide any after sales and service on loadging complaint on 12.6.2018 the service engineer inspected the fridge and found no defect in fridge. The fridge was cooling efficiently again on complaint made on 9.7.2018 service engineer inspected the fridge and found no defect. Op informed the complainant that the fridge is ok she denied to listen anything and demanded the replacement of the fridge which is not allowable.
4. OP no.2 has not filed WS despite of sufficient service.
5. Complainant has filed his affidavit and papers in support of his pleadings.  OP no.1 has also filed their affidavit and papers in support of their pleadings.

6. We have perused the material available on record and heard the parties counsel.

7. The first question of consideration before us is whether the complainant is entitled for the reliefs claimed?          

8. Complainant has repeatedly made complaint to be Op company at toll free number about inefficiency of cooling of the fridge and service engineer of the company visited and inspected the fridge and reported the fridge ok. Complainant had made complaints to company on 12.6.2018, 9.7.2018 25.7.2018, 21.9.2018 25.11.2018 and lastly on 31.12.2018 legal notice was given to the company. Service engineer inspected the fridge but the complainant could not be satisfied with working of the fridge. There appears no reason to disbelieve the complainant who made several complaint and also sent legal notice. Complaint case is proved.
9. The question formulated above is decided in favor of complainant.
10. We hereby direct the Ops either to replace the fridge by new fridge or to pay the price of the fridge Rs.79000/ with pendite lite and future interst @12% per annum along with the cost of the case Rs.10000/.
11. Ops shall comply with the direction within 45 days failing which Ops shall be prosecuted for non-compliance in accordance with section 72 of the Act for awarding punishment against him.
12.  A copy of this judgment be provided to all the parties as per rule as mandated by Consumer Protection Act, 2019. The judgment be uploaded forthwith on the website of the commission for the perusal of the parties. 
13.  File be consigned to record room along with a copy of this judgment.