BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, HISAR
Complaint No. : 575 of 2009
Date of Institution : 23.12.2009
Date of decision : 05.02.2015
Ms. Anu Tayal age 50 years wife of Sh.Abhi Ram Tayal, resident of Raghunath Bhawan, Kath Mandi Road, Hisar.
..Complainant.
Versus
- Maya Sales, 5-6-7, Falmingo Market, Hisar through its Proprietor/partner.
- Ashoka Engineers, Auth Service Centre of Whirlpool India Ltd., near Kaka Ice Factory, Hisar through its authorized person.
- The Manager/ M.C. Consumer Service Department Whirlpool India Ltd., A-8,Qutab Institutional Area “Vaitalik” 2nd Floor, New Delhi-110067.
..Opposite parties.
Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act,1986.
Before: SHRI VINOD JAIN, PRESIDENT
SMT. RAJNI GOYAT, MEMBER.
Present: Sh.Krishan Bhardwaj, counsel for the complainant.
Opposite parties No. 1 & 2 ex-parte.
Sh. R.C.Bhardwaj, counsel for opposite party No.3.
ORDER
Case of complainant- Ms. Anu Tayal is that on 17.7.2008, She purchased a Whirlpool Refrigerator, for a sum of Rs.13,500/- vide invoice No.13174 (Ex.C-2) from Maya Sales i.e. from opposite party No.1. The complainant could used the refrigerator only up to 8.7.2009, when it stopped cooling. The complainant then approached opposite party No.1, and at his instance, approached the service centre i.e. opposite party No.2, who sent their mechanic to him. The mechanic told the complainant that refrigerator, cannot work properly without replacing its compressor and then the refrigerator was taken to opposite party No.2, from the house of the complainant. It was returned on 10.8.2009, telling that now the refrigerator was properly working, but it was not properly working. It was still out of order, so she again visited the service centre, when gas was filled in the Compressor. But even then the refrigerator did not work. It is pleaded that she made several oral requests to the opposite parties, but to no effect. Averring it, as deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties, the complainant has filed this complaint on 23.12.2009, for a direction to the opposite parties for either replacement of the refrigerator or for the refund of its price of Rs.13,500/- with up to date interest, besides damages for her harassment, mental agony etc. and litigation expenses.
2. Opposite parties No. 1 & 2 have been duly proceeded against ex-parte vide order of this forum dated 2.2.2010.But case of the complainant has been contested by opposite party No.3, by filing its reply and pleading that it has never denied to provide its after sales service, under the terms of warranty and is still ready to provide the same, but the complainant herself has not filed copy of warranty card. That filing of the complaint is abuse of process of law. That only general and baseless allegations have been leveled. That opposite party No.3 has also been summoned, in this complaint after about 4 years of the filing of the complaint. That the warranty of the refrigerator has already expired on 16.7.2009 and that of the compressor on 16.7.2013. That the complainant has neither alleged any specific defect in the refrigerator nor has alleged that defect in the refrigerator is not rectifiable. That the complainant has also not filed any documentary evidence i.e. authenticated report of the expert, in support of her case. That the complainant has also not mentioned any specific date of her any complaint or complaint no. etc. That there is no deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties and so the complaint deserves dismissal.
3. In order to make out her case, the complainant has simply placed on record Ex.C-1, her own sketching supporting affidavit and Ex.C-2 copy of sale invoice dated 17.7.2008. We have gone through the record of the case carefully and have heard learned counsel for the parties.
4. Undisputedly, the refrigerator in question was used by the complainant, without any complaint from the date of purchase i.e. 17.7.2008 till first date of her alleged complaint dated 8.7.2009 when it allegedly stopped cooling; meaning thereby that she had used the refrigerator continuously, without any complaint for a period of about one year, including two summer seasons. For rest of her case there is no cogent or convincing evidence to prove that after refilling of gas in the compressor, on dated 10.8.2009 it is not in working order. Admittedly the refrigerator has been continuously in possession of the complainant and it has never been got examined from any workshop or from any expert or mechanic. Only her own supporting affidavit in this regard is not safe to rely upon, especially when her case has been contested by opposite party No.3. Had there been any genuine or serious complaint regarding any manufacturing or major defect, in all probabilities, complainant must have got atleast a copy of any job sheet. But it is not so. On the other hand, the complainant has not even alleged the date of her any complaint or complaint no. etc., in order to prove her serious complaint if any. For seek replacement of the refrigerator, it is incumbent upon the complainant, to prove that refrigerator has some manufacturing defect or some defect which is not repairable. But it is not so. Even the complainant never gave any notice to the opposite parties, alleging any manufacturing or some major defect in the refrigerator or for any deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties. Therefore, complainant has totally failed to prove any deficiency of service on the part of the opposite partis.
5. However, it is note worthy that ld. Counsel of the company has given his statement to this forum, offering to replace the compressor of the refrigerator in case it is not working. But even this offer not acceptable to the counsel of the complainant who has also given his statement to this forum in this regard. He only wants replacement of the refrigerator or refund of its price, with compensation and litigation expenses. We do not find any justification or reasonableness in this demand of the complainant. When, in the facts and circumstances of the case in hand, the company was offering replacement of the compressor of the refrigerator then what more the complainant can expect from this forum, when on merits she has no case ?
6. Any how, in view of said offer of opposite party No.3, this complaint is hereby disposed off with a direction to opposite party No.3 that in case complainant approaches it for replacement of the compressor of the refrigerator within a period of one month from today, then opposite party No.3 shall replace the compressor of the refrigerator free of cost. Parties are left to bear their own costs.
Announced in open court: President,
Dated:05.02.2015 District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Forum, Hisar.
Member/05.02.2015
