DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, NORTH-WEST
GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI
CSC-BLOCK-C, POCKET-C, SHALIMAR BAGH, DELHI-110088.
CC No: 1152/2016
D.No.__________________ Date: ________________
IN THE MATTER OF:
VARUN AGGARWAL,
S/o SH. RADHEY SHYAM AGGARWAL,
R/o H. No. AD-107/C, PITAM PURA,
DELHI-110034.… COMPLAINANT
Versus
1.MITTAL ELECTRONICS REGD.,
C-9/35, SECTOR-8,
ROHINI, DELHI-110085.
2. LLOYD,
PLOT No. 2, KALKAJI, NEW DELHI-110019.
3. DELMA AIRCON SERVICES,
SHOP No. 22 & 35, DDA MARKET,
MILAN CINEMA ROAD, NEW MOTI NAGAR,
PH-I, NEW DELHI-110015. … OPPOSITE PARTY(IES)
CORAM :SH. M.K. GUPTA, PRESIDENT
SH. BARIQ AHMED, MEMBER
MS. USHA KHANNA, MEMBER
Date of Institution: 04.11.2016
Date of decision:30.07.2018
SH. M.K. GUPTA, PRESIDENT
ORDER
1. The complainant has filed the present complaint against the OPs under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 thereby alleging that on 27.07.2016, the complainant went to the shop of OP-1 for purchasing a new Split Air Conditioner and accordingly the
CC No. 1152/2016 Page 1 of 7
worker/shopkeeper suggested to the complainant for purchasing Lloyd AC five star by disclosing some new advance features and believing upon the words of OP-1 the complainant agreed to purchase the Lloyd Split AC for a sum of Rs.22,7000/- vide retail invoice no. 8507 on 29.07.2016 with one year full warrantee and five years warrantee on compressor. The complainant further alleged that the complainant’s mother is a cancer patient and the complainant purchased said AC. On 27.07.2016, the complainant called to OP-2 on customer care no. for installation of AC against complain no. LEEL270716707762 and the next day one engineer came at the premises of the complainant and installed the AC and charged Rs.3,900/- vide cash receipt no. 1818 dated 28.07.2016 and also assured the complainant that invoice will be sent within 2-3 days as installation charge/purchasing bill.At the time of installation the complainant intimated to the engineer that it is not cooling properly but the engineer said that it is a new piece and cooling will start after few hours. After 2 days, the complainant was shocked when he found that the AC was not cooling properly. The complainant further alleged that on 04.08.2016, the complainant again called to OP-2 vide complain no. LEEL040816729127, thereafter one engineer came at the premises of the complainant after 2-3 days and found that the gas was empty. Thereafter there were so many complaints made by the complainant to OP but there
CC No. 1152/2016 Page 2 of 7
is no any proper response and after that OP-2 top-up the gas but it is still not cooling properly and in the month of September-2016, one another engineer came at the complainant’s premises and refilled the gas. The complainant further alleged that the complainant was shocked when he found that the said AC was again not cooling properly on 07.10.2016 and after that the complainant again registered complaint with OP-2 against complain no. LEEL071016919924, after that one engineer again came at the premises of the complainant and said that it is working properly but the complainant found it is not cooling properly and after that the complainant refused for it and demanded for replacement of AC because there have been so many complaints and further alleged that the complainant also approached to OP-1 for replacement of AC but the official of OPs refused for it and misbehaved with the complainant. Thereafter, the complainant many times calledto OP-2 and requested them to replace the AC but all the requests of the complainant were fallen in deaf ears as it is duly covered and protected with the warrantee period of one year but OPs keep on avoiding the matter on one pretext or the other. After that the complainant sent an e-mail to OP-2 on 16.08.2016 but there is no any response from OPs and after that the complainant again sent a registered letter to OP on 15.10.2016 vide consignment no.
CC No. 1152/2016 Page 3 of 7
ED722772840IN but no avail and the complainant further allegedthat there is deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of OPs.
2. On these allegations the complainant has filed the complaint praying for direction to OPs to refund the invoice amount of Rs.26,600/- (Rs.22,700/- as invoice amount + Rs.3,900/- as installation charge) alongwith interest paid to OPs towards purchase of AC as well as compensation of Rs.50,000/- for causing him mental agony and harassment and has also prayed for grant of legal expenses of Rs.1,100/-.
3. EarlierOP-1 has been contesting the case and filed reply and inthe reply, OP-1 submitted that OP-1 has given Lloyd Split AC vide bill no. 8507/171 on 29.07.2016 for a sum of Rs.22,700/- with one year warrantee and 4 years warrantee on compressor which is mentioned on company’s warrantee card which is installed by the company. OP-1 further submitted that the complaint is misconceived, groundless and unsustainable and is liable to be dismissed and the complaint is not maintainable as there is no deficiency in service on the part of OP-1.
4. Notices to OPs were issued through speed post for appearance on 30.01.2017 and the complainant filed proof of service of notices on the OPs i.e. track reports vide which notices of OP-2 & OP-3 were served on 17.11.2016. But none for the OP-2 & OP-3 appeared on
CC No. 1152/2016 Page 4 of 7
30.01.2017, 07.04.2017, 02.05.2017, 31.05.2017 & 03.07.2017 and as such OP-2 & OP-3 were proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 03.07.2017.
5. The complainantfiled rejoinder to the reply of OP-1 and denied the contentions of OP-1.
6. In order to prove his case the complainant filed his affidavit in evidence and also filed written arguments. The complainant also placed on record copy of retail invoice no. 8507 dated 29.07.2016 for purchase of AC for total value of Rs.22,700/- from OP-1, copy of receipt no. 1818 dated 28.07.2016 for a sum of Rs.3,900/- issued by OP-3 regarding installation of AC and copy of e-mail communication dated 16.08.2016 sent by the complainant to OP-2 alongwith postal receipt.
7. Whereas OP-1 has been provided many opportunities to file evidence but OP-1 did not file evidence and opportunity to OP-1 to file affidavit in evidence was also given subject to imposition of cost of Rs.1,000/- vide order dated 03.07.2017 but despite that OP-1 neither paid cost nor filed affidavit of any of its witness in evidence. Accordingly, right to file OP-1’s evidence was closed vide order dated 20.11.2017.
8. This forum has considered the case of the complainant in the light of evidence and documents placed on record by the complainant. The case of the complainant has remained consistent and
CC No. 1152/2016 Page 5 of 7
undoubted. There is nothing on record to disbelieve the case of the complainant. Moreover, it appears that even after filing reply by OP-1 of this case, the OPs have not bothered to contest the case and have not lead any evidence and OP-2 & OP-3 were proceeded ex-parte and whereas as no affidavit in evidence of any official of OP-1 has been filed to prove the defence of OP-1 and as such right of the OP-1 to file evidence has been closed as discussed above. It seems that there is no genuineness in the defence of OP-1.
9. On perusal of the record, we find that the complainant madecomplaints of his AC to OP-2 within warranty period but the defect has not been rectified by OP-2, though it was the duty of the OP-2 to rectify the defect once for all or to replace the product. A customer/consumer is not expected to file complaints frequently in respect of new product purchased. It is expected that the new product purchased is free from all sorts of defect in the product. Accordingly, OP-2isheld guilty of unfair trade practice and deficiency in service.
10. Accordingly, OP-2 is directed as under:-
i) To pay to the complainant an amount of Rs.26,600/- (i.e. Rs.22,700/- as invoice amount + Rs.3,900/- as installation charge) on return of the disputed AC with original bill.
CC No. 1152/2016 Page 6 of 7
ii) To pay to the complainant an amount of Rs.12,000/- as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment caused to the complainant which includes cost of litigation.
11. The above amount shall be paid by OP-2 to thecomplainant within 30 days from the date of receiving copy of this order failing which OP-2 shall be liable to pay interest on the entire awarded amount @ 10% perannum from the date of receiving copy of this order till the date of payment. If OP-2 fails to comply the order within 30 days from the date of receiving copy of this order, the complainant may approach this Forum u/s 25 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
12. Let a copy of this order be sent to each party free of cost as per regulation 21 of the Consumer Protection Regulations, 2005. Thereafter file be consigned to record room.
Announced on this 30thday of July, 2018.
BARIQ AHMED USHA KHANNA M.K. GUPTA
(MEMBER) (MEMBER) (PRESIDENT)
CC No. 1152/2016 Page 7 of 7
