Punjab

Sangrur

CC/268/2018

Sanjeev Ahuja - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s H.K.Agencies - Opp.Party(s)

Sh.Ashish Grover

21 Nov 2018

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SANGRUR.

 

                                                               

                                                Complaint No.  268

                                                Instituted on:    12.06.2018

                                                Decided on:       21.11.2018

 

 

 

Sanjeev Ahuja Prop. Ahuja Sweets & Bakers, Outside Sunami Gate, Sangrur.

                                                        …Complainant

                                Versus

 

1.             M/s. H.K. Agencies, Banasar Road, Sangrur through its Prop/partner.

2.             Blue Star, Regional Headquarters, 6^th Floor, Vatika Atrium, Golf Course Road, Sector 53, Gurugram-122 002 through its Regional Head.

3.             Blue Star, Corporate Headquarters, Kasturi Buildings, Mohan T Advani Chowk, Jamshedji Tata Road, Mumbai 400 020 through its Managing Director.

                                                        …Opposite parties

 

 

 

For the complainant  :               Shri Ashish Grover, Adv.

For OP No.1             :               Exparte.

For OP No.2&3         :               Shri Dhiraj Jindal, Adv.

 

 

 

 

Quorum:   Inderjeet Kaur, Presiding Member

                Vinod Kumar Gulati, Member

               

 

 

 

Order by : Inderjeet Kaur/Vinod Kumar Gulati, Members.

 

1.               Shri Sanjeev Ahuja, complainant (referred to as complainant in short) has preferred the present complaint against the opposite parties (referred to as OPs in short) on the ground that the complainant is a consumer of the OPs by purchasing one Deep Freezer make Blue Star 500 Ltr DF CHF500A17M07915 from Op number 1 vide invoice dated 16.6.2017 for Rs.27,500/- as the complainant is doing the work of sweet shop for his livelihood and the said freezer was for the use of the same.  The grievance of the complainant is that the said freezer is not working properly from its beginning.  The complainant immediately made the call to care centre and registered his complaint on 19.4.2018 and the OPs immediately responded and told that the grievance of the complainant shall be redressed within four hours, but nobody called or came at the shop of the complainant to check the freezer, despite his best efforts.  It is further stated that the freezer also developed some cracks in its body, which is a manufacturing defect.  The complainant requested the Ops to replace the deep freezer with a new one, but all in vain.  Thus, alleging deficiency in service on the part of the OPs, the complainant has prayed that the Ops be directed to refund the amount of the said refrigerator along with interest @ 18% per annum and further claimed compensation and litigation expenses.

 

2.               Record shows that the OP number 1 was proceeded against exparte.

 

3.               In reply filed by OP number 2 and 3, preliminary objections are taken up on the grounds that the complaint is not maintainable. It is stated that the complainant had purchased the deep freezer blue star 500 litre for the commercial purpose for the sweet shop and that the complainant is not a consumer of the OPs, that the complainant has created a false story in his complaint to mislead the Forum.  On merits, it is admitted that the complainant had purchased the deep freezer in question from the OPs. It is also admitted that upon receipt of the complaint, the OPs responded by allotting the complaint ticket number B1804193860 on the same day i.e. on 19.4.2018 and it is further averred that there is no manufacturing defect in the said product. If it has been the manufacturing defect, the said product would not have worked at all.  It is denied that the purchased product is not working since its purchase because it creates doubt that for almost 10 months the complainant did not make even a single complaint about the deep freezer in question.  It is further averred that according to the ESA visit and photo received, it was found that inner body of the said product is having scratches because of the misuse of the product by the complainant himself.   The other allegations levelled in the complaint have been denied in toto and further has prayed for dismissal of the complaint with special costs.

 

4.               The learned counsel for the complainant has produced Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-7 copies of documents and affidavit and closed evidence. On the other hand, the learned counsel for OP number 2&3 has produced Ex.OP2&3/1 to Ex.OP2&3/2 and closed evidence.

 

5.               We have carefully perused the complaint and heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the complainant. In our opinion, the complaint merits acceptance, for these reasons.

 

6.               It is the case of the complainant that he purchased the deep freezer for using the same at his shop in order to earn livelihood and not for commercial purpose.  To support his contention, the learned counsel for the complainant has cited M/s. Paramount Digital Color Lab and others versus M/s. Agfa India Pvt. Ltd. and others 2018(2) RCR (Civil) 69 (Supreme Court).  As such, we are of the considered opinion that the complainant is a consumer and his complaint is very much maintainable as he purchased the deep freezer in order to earn his livelihood by way of self employment and not for resale.

 

                         

7.               Ex.C-1 is the copy of the invoice showing the purchase of the deep freezer in question for Rs.27,500/- by the complainant vide invoice dated 16.6.2017. Ex.C-3 is the copy of message dated April 19 showing that the complainant lodged the complaint regarding defect in the deep freezer and again Ex.C-4 and Ex.C-5 are the copies of the messages regarding the defects in the deep freezer sent to the OPs.  It is worth mentioning here that the complainant had purchased the deep freezer in question on 16.6.2017, but the fact remains that the deep freezer in question did not work properly from the beginning of its purchase, but the Ops failed to set right the deep freezer despite giving assurance to the complainant for the same. We may mention here that the complainant has also produced on record the expert opinion submitted by one Mohinder Kumar of “Singh Connectivity” Ex.C-7, wherein it is clearly mentioned that he kept the blue star freezer in question for two days and checked the same and found that “there are cracks in the freezer due to manufacturing defect and compressor of the  freezer is also defective as the cooling of the freezer is very less and further found that there is manufacturing defects in the deep freezer which are not curable.” Further to support his contention, the complainant has relied upon the affidavit of expert Mohinder Kumar Ex.C-8. In the circumstances, we find it to be a clear cut case of deficiency in service and of unfair trade practice on the part of the Ops by supplying the complainant a defective deep freezer, which the complainant had purchased in order to earn his livelihood by way of self employment as the deep freezer was being used at his small shop.  As such, we are of the considered opinion that the complainant deserves the replacement of the deep freezer in question with a new one.

 

 

8.               Accordingly, in view of our above discussion, we allow the complaint of the complainant and direct OPs who are jointly and severally liable to replace the deep freezer in question with a new one.  The Ops are further directed to pay to the complainant an amount of Rs.10,000/- on account of compensation for mental tension, agony and harassment and an amount of Rs.5000/- on account of litigation expenses.

 

9.               This order of ours be complied with within a period of thirty days of its communication. A copy of this order be issued to the parties free of cost. File be consigned to records.

                Pronounced.

                November 21, 2018.

 

                                                     (Inderjeet Kaur)

                                                   Presiding Member

                               

 

                                       

                                                     (Vinod Kumar Gulati)

                                                               Member