DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BARNALA, PUNJAB.

 

Complaint Case No : 104/2019

Date of Institution   : 06.08.2019

Date of Decision    : 14.01.2020

 

Gurmeet Singh aged about 50 years son of Karnail Singh resident of Street No. 3, Nanaksar Nagar, Barnala, Tehsil and District Barnala.    

                   …Complainant Versus

 

1.Mitashi Edutainment Pvt. Ltd., A Wing, 1901-1916, Kailash Business Park, Veer Sawarkar Road, Parksite, Vikroli West, Mumbai-400079, Fax-+912225006660. 

2.New Ashoka Electrical Store, Handiaya Bazar, Barnala through its Proprietor (Pin code- 148101). 

             …Opposite Parties

 

Complaint Under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

Present: Sh. P.S. Aulakh counsel for complainant.

Opposite party No. 1 & 2 exparte.

 

Quorum.-

1. Sh. Kuljit Singh : President

2.Sh. Tejinder Singh Bhangu : Member

 

(ORDER BY KULJIT SINGH, PRESIDENT):

 

The complainant namely Gurmeet Singh has filed the present complaint under Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (in short the Act) against Mitashi Edutainment and others (hereinafter referred as opposite parties).  

2. The facts leading to the present complaint are that the complainant purchased one Washing Machine Make Mitashi Full Auto WM 7.8 KG MI70000180822 bearing HSN/SAC code 8450 from opposite party No. 2 for Rs. 16,500 vide invoice No. GST-1899 dated 8.12.2017 being authorized dealer of opposite party No. 1. The above said washing machine was having five years warranty. It is further alleged that after the purchase of above said washing machine, the same started giving trouble to the complainant due to manufacturing defect and in this regard the complainant got his complaint registered with the opposite party No. 1 bearing call No. 17120829000341 on 8.12.2017  and requested for the change of above said washing machine, but with no result. The complainant also got his complaint registered with the opposite party No. 1 bearing call No. 19040329000223 on 3.4.2018, but with no result. Further, the complainant again got his complaint registered with opposite party No. 1 bearing call No. 18092529000119 on 25.9.2018 for the change of above said washing machine, but with no effect. Thereafter, the complainant served a legal notice dated 1.5.2019 to the opposite parties wherein due to typographical mistake word mobile phone was mentioned instead of washing machine and the same was corrected by the complainant vide notice dated 2.5.2019, but all in vain. Hence, the present complaint is filed seeking the following reliefs.- 

1) To change the washing machine having no such manufacturing defect. 

2) To pay Rs. 1,50,000/-  as compensation and Rs. 20,000/- as litigation expenses.   

3. Notices were sent to opposite parties No. 1 & 2 but they failed to appear and were proceeded against exparte vide orders dated 16.9.2019 and 15.11.2019.   

4. In support of his case the complainant tendered into evidence copy of invoice dated 8.12.2017 Ex.C-1, copy of warranty card Ex.C-2,  copies of acknowledgment of complaints Ex.C-3 to Ex.C-5, copy of notice dated 1.5.2019 Ex.C-6, postal receipt Ex.C-7, copy of notice dated 1.5.2019 Ex.C-8, postal receipt Ex.C-9, copy of legal notice Ex.C-10, postal receipts Ex.C-11 and Ex.C-12, his own affidavit Ex.C-13 and closed the evidence. 

5. We have heard the learned counsel for the complainant and have gone through the record on file. 

6. In order to prove his case the complainant has placed on record his detailed affidavit Ex.C-13, in which he reiterated the averments as mentioned in the complaint. Further, the complainant has placed on record copy of bill/invoice Ex.C-1, which shows that on 8.12.2017 the complainant has purchased the above said washing machine by paying an amount of Rs. 16,500/- from the opposite party No. 2. He has further placed on record copy of warranty card Ex.C-2 which shows that the washing machine was having five years warranty. Further, copies of lodging complaints/messages to the opposite parties from Ex.C-3 to Ex.C-5, which shows that the complainant has lodged complaints with the opposite party No. 1. Further, Ex.C-6 to Ex.C-11 are the copies of legal notices and postal receipts which were sent by the complainant to the opposite parties. 

7. Perusal of the record shows that the complainant has purchased the above said washing machine from the opposite party No. 2 and paid an amount of Rs. 16,500/- vide invoice GST-1899 dated 8.12.2017 Ex.C-1 to the opposite party No. 2. Further, the complainant has lodged many complaints with the opposite party No. 1 as the above said washing machine was giving trouble to the complainant from the very beginning and this fact is very well within the knowledge of opposite parties because the complainant has lodged many complaints with the opposite party No. 1, but the opposite party No. 1 has failed to send their Engineer in the premises of complainant to rectify the defects. Moreover, the opposite party No. 2 who is the local dealer/authorized agent of opposite party No. 1 has failed to rectify the problem in the washing machine. We are also of the view that the complainant is able to bring cogent, reliable and trustworthy evidence on the file in support of his allegations. It is also not in dispute that the washing machine was within warranty period when the defect/problem has been occurred. We have also perused the evidence of the complainant who has not tendered affidavit of any expert or report of any expert in his evidence to prove that what type of trouble has been occurred in the washing machine, which is necessary to prove a manufacturing defect in the product, so the complainant is failed to prove manufacturing defect in the washing machine and he is not entitled for new washing machine. 

8. As no one has come forwarded from the side of the opposite parties to contest the allegations of the complainant, which are otherwise appears to be genuine and supported by various documents, in that event, we have no alternative except to believe the contents of the complaint, which are un-rebutted. It is important to mention here that the opposite parties despite their service intentionally have not come present to plead their case. Moreover, it is the duty of opposite party No. 2 who is local dealer/agent of the company to rectify/repair the defects of the washing machine as the complainant has lodged his complaints with both the opposite parties regarding the defects of the washing machine.

9. In view of the above discussion, we allow the present complaint against the opposite parties and direct the opposite parties to repair the washing machine and change the all defective parts with new one free of costs. The opposite parties jointly and severally are also directed to pay Rs. 5,000/- to the complainant as compensation and litigation expenses. The opposite parties jointly and severally are further directed to deposit Rs. 5,000/- in the Consumer Legal Aid Account maintained by this Forum.  Compliance of the order be made within the period of 30 days from the date of the receipt of the copy of this order. 

  ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN FORUM:

       14th Day of January, 2020 

 

            (Kuljit Singh)

            President

              

(Tejinder Singh Bhangu)

Member