BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KAITHAL.
Complaint No.240/18.
Date of instt.:31.8.2018.
Date of Decision:17.12.2018.
M/s Bhagwati Plywood & Hardware Store, Narwana, Tehsil Narwana, Distt. Jind through its Proprietor Shri Mani Ram s/o Shri Kapoor Chand, r/o Opp Surjewala Bhawan, Railway Road, Narwana, Tehsil Narwana, Distt. Jind.
……….Complainant.
Versus
- Modern Electronics, Park Road, Kaithal through its Proprietor/Partner.
- Vikas Electronics, Rani Talab, Jind.
- Hitachi Co. Pvt. Ltd., Unit 802, A& B, 8th Floor, Konnecus Building Bhavbhuti Marg, near Monto Bridge, Cannaught Place, New Delhi.
……..Opposite Parties.
COMPLAINT UNDER SEC. 12 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, 1986.
Before: Shri Rajbir Singh, Presiding Member.
Smt. Suman Rana, Member.
Present: Shri Hem Raj Wadhwa, Advocate for the complainant.
Opposite parties ex parte.
Shri Vikram Tiwari, Advocate for the Opposite party No.3.
ORDER
(RAJBIR SINGH, PRESIDING MEMBER).
The complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986, with the averments that he was in need of Air Conditioner and as such, he visited the respondent No.1 on 28.4.2017 and respondent No.1 show the AC of Hitachi company and told there is 5 years and 10 years warranty and guarantee motor and compressor etc, which was manufactured by respondent No.3 and convinced him regarding the best performance of same and pressurized him to purchase the AC of Hitachi company. It is further alleged that keeping in faith of the respondent No.1, he purchased AC Split of Hitachi company Model RAU 518KWD by paying Rs.38,000/- in cash vide Invoice No.28686 dt. 28.4.2017. It is further alleged that after purchase of one day of said AC, the AC stopped working and water started coming outside from the fans in his room and said AC became out of order. It is further alleged that he approached the respondents No.1 & 2 care centre in the next date of purchase of AC and he informed the customer care toll free No.1860 258 4848 through his mobile, who told that the mechanic/ service holder came at his premises for repair within 48 hours, but after 48 hours, no mechanic came to his premises for service. It is further alleged that thereafter he contacted to company toll free numbers of company on dt. 3.8.2017, 29.8.2017 and on 04.9.2017 and registered complaint Nos.17080301109, 17082903232 and 17090403864 respectively, but no response was given by the respondent/company. It is further alleged that he requested the respondent No.2 time and again to change the said AC with new one because there is a manufacturing defect in the said AC, but the respondent lingered on the matter on one pretext or other and till date, no fruitful results. This way, the OPs are deficient in service. Hence, this complaint is filed.
2. Upon notice, the opposite parties did not appear and proceeded against ex parte vide order dt. 16.10.2018 by this Forum. However, it is pertinent to mention here that on 07.12.2018 when the case was fixed for arguments, at that time, Shri Vikram Tiwari, Advocate appeared for OP No.3 and moved an application for joining the ex parte proceedings, which was allowed and the applicant/OP No.3 is allowed to join the proceeding at the stage of argument.
3. The complainant tendered in evidence affidavit Ex.CW1/A; documents Ex.C1 & Ex.C2 and closed the evidence on 16.11.2018.
4. We have heard ld. counsel for the complainant as well as for OP No.3 and perused the case file carefully and minutely and have also gone through the evidence available on the file.
5. Ld. counsel for the complainant produced written arguments arguing therein that the complainant was in need of Air Conditioner and as such, he visited the respondent No.1 on 28.4.2017 and respondent No.1 showed the AC of Hitachi company and told there is 5 years and 10 years warranty and guarantee motor and compressor etc, which was manufactured by respondent No.3 and convinced him reg. It is further argued that keeping in faith of the respondent No.1, the complainant purchased AC Split of Hitachi company Model RAU 518KWD by paying Rs.38,000/- in cash vide Invoice No.28686 dt. 28.4.2017. It is further argued that after purchase of one day of said AC, the AC stopped working and water started coming outside from the fans in his room and said AC became out of order. It is further argued that the complainant approached the respondents No.1 & 2 care centre in the next date of purchase of AC and he informed the customer care toll free No.1860 258 4848 through his mobile, who told that the mechanic/ service holder came at his premises for repair within 48 hours, but after 48 hours, no mechanic came to his premises for service. It is further argued that thereafter the complainant contacted to company toll free numbers on dt. 3.8.2017, 29.8.2017 and on 04.9.2017 and registered complaint Nos.17080301109, 17082903232 and 17090403864 respectively, but no response was given by the respondent/company. It is further argued that he requested the respondent No.2 time and again to change the said AC with new one because there is a manufacturing defect in the said AC, but the respondent lingered on the matter on one pretext or other and till date, no fruitful results. The ld. counsel for the complainant produced original bill and same is placed on the case file.
6. On the other hand, it is argued by the ld. counsel for the OP No.3 that the complainant purchased the AC in question on 28.4.2017 and alleged in his complaint that the AC became defective after one day of its purchase, but the complainant lodged the complaint on company’s toll free no.1708030119 on 03.8.2017, i.e. after more than three months from the date of purchase of A.C. in question.
7. From the pleadings and evidence of the complainant, we found that the complainant purchased A.C. of Hitachi company Model RAU 518KWD for a sum of Rs.38,000/- vide Notary attested copy of Invoice No.28686 dt. 28.4.2017 Ex.C1.
8. The ld. counsel for the complainant argued that after purchase of one day of AC in question, the AC became defective and the complainant lodged the complaint on toll free number of the OPs various times, but the OPs did not resolve his problem till today. On the other hand, the ld. counsel for the OP No.3 argued that the complainant purchased the AC in question on 28.4.2017 and he lodged the complaint about the AC very first time on company’s toll free number on 03.8.2017, meaning thereby, the AC worked properly from 28.4.2017 to 03.8.2017, but this contention of the OPs has no force, because, the complainant has specifically mentioned in Para No.3 of his complaint that the AC stopped working after one day of its purchase and he approached to the respondents No.1 & 2 care centre in the next date of purchase of said AC and informed the customer care’s toll free No.1860 258 4848 through his mobile, but the OPs did not resolve the grievance of the AC in question of the complainant. Thereafter, after a gap of more than three months, the complainant lodged various complaints about the defect of the AC in question on the OPs/company toll free numbers on 03.8.2017, 29.8.2017 and 04.9.2017 and registered complaints Nos.17080301109, 17082903232 and 17090403864 respectively. However, it is pertinent to mention here that the AC in question of the complainant became defective in the month of April, when there is summer season and in that season, the AC is must required, but the complainant filed the second complaint on the toll free number of the OPs on 03.8.2017 i.e. after a gap of about three months from the first complaint in the month of April 2017. So it is not understandable as to why the complainant remained mum about the defect of the AC in question from end of April 2017 till fist week of August 2017.
9. The ld. counsel for the OPs further argued that the OPs were and is still ready to repair the AC as per warranty policy. To support his case, the complainant produced his affidavit Ex.CW1/A; Notary attested copy of bill as Ex.C1 & documents regarding filing of complaint before the DCDRF, Jind as Ex.C2. However, it is pertinent to mention here that the complainant has not produced any such evidence on the basis of which, it can be said the AC in question has a manufacturing defect. As per the complainant, the AC in question was having a problem and as per pleading of the OPs, the OPs are ready to repair the same as per warranty policy. From the pleadings and evidence of the case, it is clear that the AC was within the warranty period. In these facts & circumstances of the case, we are of the considered view that AC in question became defective within warranty period and OPs have failed to resolve the grievances of the complainant. Hence, the OPs are deficient.
10. Thus, in view of above discussion, we allow the complaint and direct the OPs to repair the defective Air Conditioner of the complainant free of costs. The service engineer, who will repair the AC in question of the complainant, be directed to submit a repair certificate about repair of the AC in question, before this Forum within 15 days positively. We further direct the OPs to pay Rs.3300/- to the complainant on account of compensation for harassment, mental agony and costs of litigation charges. All the Ops are jointly and severally liable. Let the order be complied with within 30 days from the date of communication of order. A copy of this order be sent to the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.
Announced.
Dt.17.12.2018. (Suman Rana) (Rajbir Singh)
Member. Presiding Member.
Present: Shri Hem Raj Wadhwa, Advocate for the complainant.
Opposite parties ex parte.
Shri Vikram Tiwari, Advocate for the OP No.3.
Remaining arguments not advanced. On the request of the ld. counsel for the parties, case is adjourned to 17.12.2018 for remaining arguments.
Dated:11.12.2018. Member. Presiding Member.
Present: Shri Hem Raj Wadhwa, Advocate for the complainant.
Opposite parties ex parte.
Shri Vikram Tiwari, Advocate for the OP No.3.
Remaining arguments heard. Order pronounced, vide our separate order in detail of even date, the present complaint is allowed. File be consigned to record-room after due compliance.
Dated:17.12.2018. Member. Presiding Member.
