IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KOLLAM

            DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF MARCH 2016

Present: -        Smt. G.Vasanthakumari, President

Adv. Ravisusha, Member

Adv.M.Praveen Kumar, Member

         CC.No.231/2015

A.A.Shafi                                                                   :                       Complainant

Son of Ahammed Kunju

Ushus, SRA.No.05, Kilikollur P.O

Kollam – 691004

V/S

            1.         M/s LG Electronics India Pvt.Ltd:                          Opposite parties

                        Elegant Electronics  

                        Kochalummudu

                        Kollam – 691012

            2.         Customer Service Department

                        LG Electronics India Pvt.Ltd

                        Plot No.051, Surajpur Kasna Road

                        Greater Noida – 201306(MP)

ORDER

SMT.G.VASANTHAKUMARI, PRESIDENT

             Complainant’s case is that he had one Fully Automatic LG washing machine, that in June 2014 it was found not working, that he approached opposite party 1 to rectify the defects, that opposite party 1 sent a technician to his house, that he examined the machine and told that the belt of the washing machine is seen slipped off from its motor, that the machine was shifted to opposite party 1’s service centre for repairs, and a job sheet was given, but even after six months the machine was not repaired, that the complainant contacted opposite party 2 by letter dated 31/12/2014, that through phone call early repair assured, that on 04/02/2015 he obtained a phone call informing that the machine is repaired at a cost of Rs.4500/- , that the machine was delivered and bill amount paid, that the machine was not checked, that meanwhile he purchased  a new one for his need and the repaired one not checked since water tap and electric connection could not be provided to connect the repaired washing machine at the time of its delivery, that

(2)

the top of the machine was seen damaged , broken and pasted with some plastic materials, that several parts of the body of the washing machine became rusted due to careless handling of the apparatus in the workshop of 1st opposite party , that on 07/02/15 he got the service of  plumber and electrician, that a second point was provided to fit the washing machine, that for connecting the washing machine even though requested nobody came from the service centre , that the outlet pipe was found missing, that a new one purchased by spending Rs.225/-, that as soon as the machine was connected it started leaking, that the matter was brought to the notice of opposite party 1 over  phone, but nothing happened, that on 09/07/15 he sent a letter to the 2nd opposite party by email, that a copy of the same was sent to opposite party 1 , that ultimately opposite party 1 and 2 told that to repair  he had to pay Rs.450/-, that they told that a technician will be sent but nobody turned up so far, that it amounts to deficiency in service and hence this complaint to direct opposite parties 1 and 2 to refund Rs.4719/-, Rs.500/- per month for keeping the machine idle compensation for mental agony Rs.14,000/- and cost Rs.1000/- and cost for further repairs Rs.2000/-.

            Opposite parties 1 and 2 remained absent even after receipt of notice from the Forum. Hence they are declared exparte.

            The points that would arise for consideration are:-

.Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties?
.Reliefs and costs?

The evidence in this case consists of only the documentary evidence Exts.P1 to P5.

The Points:- This case is alleging deficiency in service against opposite party 1 service centre. It is in evidence through proof affidavit put in by complainant and Exts P1 to P5 that he was using his LG washing machine without much complaint since 2004 and in June 2014 it was found not working. He had contacted opposite party 1 service centre. One technician came, examined the machine and told him that its motor belt is slipping from the drum and hence the machine has to be entrusted to their workshop. Accordingly the machine was entrusted with opposite party 1 and opposite party 1 given Ext.P1 job sheet on 11/06/2014. Ext.P1 is a blank job sheet in the name of complainant. Ext.P3 is retail invoice dated 04/02/15 which shows that complainant paid Rs.4494/- towards value of drum, inlet valve, VAT, service charges (D), Basic service Tax and transporting charges. But even upto this time washing machine remains idle since the service is defective. It is also in evidence that he had purchased a new machine for his use since the old one

(3)

became defective. Even though the defects were allegedly cured by opposite party 1 even now it is not working and opposite party 1’s service men not turned up even to connect it even after repeated requests. We are of the opinion that it is nothing but deficiency in service.

            In the result, the complaint is allowed in part directing opposite party 1 to pay bill amount Rs.4494 + Rs.225/-(value of out let hose) = Rs.4719/-  and Rs.5000/- as compensation and cost Rs.1000/-. The order is to be complied with within 30 days of receipt of a copy of this order, in default Rs.4719/- will carry interest of the rate of 12%.

Dated this the 31st  day of  March 2016.                                                                                                                                                                   

G.VASANTHAKUMARI:Sd/-

ADV.RAVISUSHA: Sd/-

ADV.M.PRAVEENKUMAR: Sd/-

Forwarded/by Order

Senior Superintendent

I N D E X

Ext.P.1:- Copy of job sheet

Ext.P.2:-Letter dated 31/12/2014

Ext.P.3:-Copy of retail invoice

Ext.P.4:-Copy of estimate

Ext.P.5:-Copy of letter