BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SIRSA.

                                                          Consumer Complaint no.264 of 2016                                                                                   

                                                           Date of Institution         :    30.09.2016

                                                          Date of Decision   :    08.06.2017.

Ranjeet Singh son of Shri Baldev Singh, resident of village Rori, Tehsil & District Sirsa.

                                                              ……Complainant.

                                      Versus.

1 M/s L.B. Electronics, Sadar Bazar, Sirsa, Tehsil and District Sirsa (Haryana), through its Proprietor/partner. (Authorized Dealer of LG Refrigerators Product).

2 LG Electronics India Private Limited, A-27, Mohan Cooperative Industrial Estate, Mathura Road, New Delhi-110044 through its Managing Director.

                                                                                ...…Opposite party.

            Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act,1986.

Before:                 SHRI RAGHBIR SINGH …………………PRESIDENT

                             SMT. RAJNI GOYAT…………… MEMBER

SH.MOHINDER PAL RATHI ………………MEMBER.      

Present:       Sh Prahlad Rai,  Advocate for the complainant.

Opposite party no.1 exparte VOD 22.12.16.

Opposite party no.2 exparte VOD 01.05.17.

                   ORDER

                   The case of the complainant, in brief is that on 11.03.2016, the complainant had purchased one LG Refrigerator Model No. D372HDWL from the op no.1 on cash payment of Rs. 40,000/- vide bill no. 38807 dated 11.03.2016 (TIN: 06372907472 dated 13.02.1989). the op no.1 is authorized dealer of LG Refrigerator product and op no.2 is manufacturing company of LG Refrigerator. The complainant is consumer of ops. The complainant is having every right to file the present complaint against the ops for his grievances. At the time of purchase, respondent no.1 gave guarantee for above said Refrigerator for a period of six year from its purchase in all respects. He also assured that during six years in case of any defect the same shall be removed free of costs and in case of any manufacturing defect, the same shall be replaced through the company manufacturer/op no.2. Since purchasing the said Refrigerator, it is not working properly because it stopped cooling in all respect; stopped to prepare ice in the refrigerator and ever the motor/compressor of refrigerator became defective one as it came out very high loud. The complainant immediately visited op no.1 narrating the same defects. The op no.1 sent mechanic to the house of complainant who checked and found that there is manufacturing defects and the same is not in repairable condition. Even the complainant approached op no.1 for its replacement because due to manufacturing defects refrigerator is liable to replaced from the company but all in vain. Even on the spot the same is completely dead stop as there is no cooling system working in said refrigerator. The complainant made complaints to the ops vide complaint no. RNA-160912087646 dated 12.09.2016 and RNA-160528059048 & RNA-160912087646 and requested them to admit the claim of complainant and to replace the said refrigerator through the company/respondent no.2 as per his assurances and guarantee given by him to the complainant because this refrigerator is still under guarantee, but all in vain and after postponing the matter with one pretext or the other, the op no.1 has refused to admit the claim of the complainant and refused to replace the same. The act and conduct of the   ops comes under the ambit of deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice, due to which complainant is suffering recurring financial losses till today and also suffering serious harassment, humiliation, much mental tensions, worries, fatigue, disappointment and dis-may. Therefore, the complainant is entitled to a sum of Rs.50,000/- as compensation from respondents on these counts, besides the costs of the above said Refrigerator worth Rs.40,000/- along with interest and the costs and other incidental charges from the ops. Hence, this complaint.

2.                On notice, none appeared on behalf of opposite parties no.1 and 2 and therefore, they were proceeded against exparte.

3.                The complainant has tendered his affidavit Ex.PW1, bill of Refrigerator Ex.C1, copy of complaints number mark C2.

4.                We have heard learned counsel for complainant and have perused the case file carefully.

5.                The complainant has tendered his affidavit Ex.PW1 wherein he has testified all the facts so set out by him in his complaint. In support, he has placed on file copy of complaints number as mark C2 but opposite party has failed to replace the new Refrigerator to the complainant inspite of his several requests. In these circumstances, we allow the present complaint and the complainant is directed to produce the Refrigerator at the premises of the op no.1 and gave intimation in writing to op no.2 within seven days from receipt of copy of this order. Thereafter, the op no.1 and 2 jointly and severally will thoroughly check the Refrigerator and set it defect free within 30 days of receipt of the Refrigerator at the premises of op no.1, failing which the op no.1 and 2 are directed to refund Rs.40,000/- as the cost of the said Refrigerator within next 30 days, failing which this amount will attract 7% rate of interest from the date of complaint i.e. 30.09.2016.  A copy of this order be supplied to the parties free of costs. File be consigned to record room after due compliance.

Announced in open Forum.                                 President,

Dated:08.06.2017.                                               District Consumer Disputes

                                                                   Redressal Forum, Sirsa.

                                    Member.