Chandigarh

DF-II

CC/112/2020

Raj Kumar - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s Harman International (India) Pvt. Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Pardeep Kumar, Adv.

02 Sep 2024

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION-II,

U.T. CHANDIGARH

Consumer Complaint  No	:	112/2020
Date  of  Institution	:	14.02.2020
Date   of   Decision	:	02.09.2024

 

 

 

Raj Kumar Son of Late Sh. Som Nath, House No. 2008, Sector 24-C, Chandigarh.      

                                                                    .…...Complainant.

                                                Versus

1. M/s  Harman International (India) Pvt. Ltd. Prestiage Technologies Park, 4^th Floor, Jupiter 2A, Marathahalli, Ring Road, Bangalore-560103. (Importer & Marketed)
2. Shreyash Retail Private, Indo Space Logistic Park, Luhari Pataudi Kulana Road, MDR-132, Distt, Jhajjar, Haryana
3. Flextron-ics Technologies India Pvt. Ltd., Mobile Connect SCO: 2473-74, 2^nd Floor, Sector 22-C Chandigarh.

                                                ….. Opposite  Partiy. 

BEFORE:        MR. AMRINDER SINGH, SIDHU, PRESIDENT

          MR. S.K. SARDANA, MEMBER

Present:             Sh. Pardeep Kumar, Counsel for Complainant.        

                        Opposite Parties  No 1 & 2 Ex-parte.

                        Sh. Gaurav Bhardwaj, Counsel for Opposite Party                           No. 3 (Through Video Conference)

 

ORDER BY AMRINDER SINGH SIDHU, M.A (Eng.),LLM,PRESIDENT

1]             The Complainant filed the present Complaint pleading that he had purchased a Headphone make JBL T-160 wired Headset with Mic on 10.06.2019 from Opposite Party No. 2. The Authorized seller of Opposite Party No.1 for an amount of Rs. 899/- including taxes with a one year warranty manufactured by Harman International Industries, Inc, 8500-Balboa, Blvd, Northridge CA 91329, USA and the same was imported and marked by the Opposite Party No1 in India and sold by Opposite Party No.2 and the Opposite Party No.3 is the authorized service Centre at Chandigarh. The above said Headphone stopped working on 28.01.2020 i.e. within warranty period of one year from the date of its purchase i.e. 10.06.2019. Complainant approached Opposite Party No.3 to repair it but Opposite Party No.3 refused to repair it on the ground that product is out of warranty due to physical damage whereas product is intact and not physically damaged. The Complainant requested all the Opposite Parties to resolve his issue but vain. The Complainant alleged that refuse to repair or refund within in warranty period on the false ground of physical/liquid damage amounts to deficiency in service as well as Unfair Trade Practice adopted by O.P.s which caused him harassment and mental agony.  Lastly, Complainant prayed for a direction to replace the product or refund Rs 899/- i.e. cost of Headphone alongwith interest, Compensation and litigation expenses.

2]    After the service of notice upon the opposite parties No 1 & 2, Opposite Parties No 1 & 2 did not appear before this commission. Hence, they are proceeded against Ex-parte.

       However, Opposite Party No. 3 appeared through Counsel and filed their written versions taking preliminary objections that the present Complaint is not maintainable; the product is out of warranty; The ear phone was found to be physically damaged and the Complainant was informed that the ear phone is out of warranty, as the same is physically damaged. On merits, O.P No.  3 denied all the allegations made against them and prayed for the dismissal of complaint with costs.

3]           Replication has also been filed by the complainant thereby controverting the assertions of OP made in their written version reiterating their stand in the Complaint.

4]           Parties led evidence in support of their contentions.

5]           We have heard the Counsel for the parties and have gone through the record available on file.

6]    The Complainant in order to prove his complaint placed on record “Tax Invoice” for an amount of Rs. 899/- dated 10.06.2019 wherein one year warranty was given for the product. The Product stop working on 28.01.2020 i.e. within warranty period of one year. Complainant went to Opposite Party No. 3 for repair/replace of the product within warranty period but Opposite Party No. 3 refused to repair / refund the same on account of product out of warranty due to physical/liquid damage. The Complainant has placed on record his affidavit duly attested by oath Commission that the product was not physically/liquid damaged. The Opposite Party No. 3 did not produce any kind of “Test Report” proving that the product of physically damaged. The Complainant has stated on oath that it is not physically damaged. As Opposite Parties has alleged that the product is physically/liquid damaged so the burden of proof is upon the Opposite Parties to prove that it is physically liquid/ damaged by way of some expert or test report. The Stand of Opposite Party No.3 is that it is physically damaged but in absence of any Test Report, this plea is not sustainable. As the product  stop working with warranty period of one year so Opposite Parties are liable to replace the product or refund the cost of product i.e. 899/-. Therefore, refusal by Opposite Parties to replace the product or refund the amount of Rs. 899/- amounts of deficiency in after sale service as well as Unfair Trade Practice which caused harassment and mental agony to the Complainant. The Complaint of the Complainant is partly allowed and Opposite Parties are directed to refund the cost of product i.e. 899/- alongwith interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing this Complaint till the date of its actual realisation and also pay lump sum compensation of  Rs. 5000/-.

    The above said order shall be complied with by the OPs No.1 to 3 within a period of 90 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

7]    The pending application(s) if any, stands disposed off accordingly.

8]    The Office is directed to send certified copy of this order to the parties, free of cost, as per rules & law under The Consumer Protection Rules & Act accordingly. After compliance file be consigned to record room.    

 

Announced                                                                                            Sd/-

02.09.2024                                                                       (AMRINDER SINGH SIDHU)

     PRESIDENT

 

                                                                                           Sd/-

                                                                        (S.K.  SARDANA)

                                                                        MEMBER.

C.k