Haryana

Panchkula

185/2015

SUBHASH CHANDER MADAN. - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/S MANGLA VISION. - Opp.Party(s)

AMAR CHAND

05 Jan 2016

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,  PANCHKULA.                                                            

Consumer Complaint No	:	185 of 2015
Date of Institution	:	16.09.2015
Date of Decision	:	05.01.2016

 

Subhash Chander Madan s/o Sh.K.L.Madan, R/o House No.1546, Sector-21, Panchkula (Haryana).

                                                                                          ….Complainant

Versus

 

1.       M/s Mangla Vision, through its Proprietor, SCO 29, Sector-11, Panchkula.

2.       Unique Electronics, through its Proprietor, (Authorized Service Centre of LG electronics Pvt. Ltd.), SCO No.42, Haripur, Near Mittu Jewelers, Sector-4, Panchkula.

3.       LG Electronics India (P) Ltd., through its Managing Director, A Wing, Third Floor, D-3, District Centre, Saket, New Delhi-110017.

                                                                                      ….Opposite Parties

COMPLAINT UNDER SEC. 12 OF THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, 1986.

 

Before:                 Mr.Dharam Pal, President.

Mrs.Anita Kapoor, Member.

Mr.S.P.Attri, Member.

For the Parties:     Complainant in person. 

Mr.Mohit Sachdeva, Adv., for the Ops (Defence struck off).

ORDER

(Dharam Pal, President)

 

1. The complaint has been filed by the complainant-Subhash Chander Madan with the averments that he purchased one LCD 42 inches, make LG, model 42LG80FR on 28.09.2009 for Rs.60,000/- from OP No.1 (Annexure C-1). The abovesaid LCD developed a snag on 14.08.2015 and was not working properly. The sound of LCD went off after 2/3 minutes of its start and after 2/3 minutes picture also disappeared and verticals lines appeared over the screen. The LCD also stopped responding to its remote during that time. On 16.08.2015, the complainant contacted OP No.1 for repair of LCD who advised the complainant to contact the service centre at No.1800 180 9999. The complainant lodged a complaint with customer care on 16.08.2015 which assured the complainant to rectify the problem within 24 hours. The representative of OP No.2 visited the complainant’s residence on 16.08.2015 and told that the main PCB i.e. mother board has developed the defect. The representative for the Op No.2 told that they were not having required part with them and also told that model of LCD was discontinued and OP No.3 has also no stock of that part. The complainant requested the representative to get the LCD repaired or replace the defective part for which he was ready to bear the cost. The complainant also sent an email to Op No.3 and requested to resolve the issue at the earliest. Despite all requests, the Ops have not bothered to resolve the issue. On 22.08.2015, the complainant again lodged a complaint No.RNA150822076480 with the customer care but no action has been taken by the Ops. On 01.09.2015, the LCD was taken by OP No.2 to its workshop for its repair but it could not be repaired and returned to the complainant on 05.09.2015. The company is supposed to supply the spares and provide service for those products for a reasonable life period. The complainant issued legal notice dated 25.08.2015 to the Ops but to no avail. This act of the OPs amounts to deficiency in service on their part. Hence, this complaint.
2. The Ops, through their counsel Sh.Amandeep Bindra, appeared before this Forum on 23.10.2015 and sought time for filing of the written statement. On 09.11.2015, the counsel for the Ops again sought time for filing written statement and the case was adjourned for 24.11.2015 for filing written statement. On 24.11.2015, none appeared on behalf of the Ops nor filed any written statement and the case was adjourned for 02.12.2015 for filing written statement. Again on 02.12.2015, none has appeared nor filed any written statement after availing opportunities and the defence of the Ops was ordered to be struck off vide order dated 02.12.2015.
3. The complainant has tendered into evidence by way of affidavit Annexure C-A alongwith documents Annexure C-1 to C-6 and closed the evidence.
4. On 24.12.2015, the case was fixed for arguments, the learned counsel for the Ops Sh.Mohit Sachdeva appeared and filed his vakalatnama and written arguments.
5. We have heard the complainant appearing in person and learned counsel for the OPs and have also perused the record carefully and minutely.
6. It is evident that the complainant purchased one LCD 42 inches, make LG, model 42LG80FR on 28.09.2009 for Rs.60,000/- from OP No.1 (Annexure C-1). The abovesaid LCD developed a snag on 14.08.2015 and was not working properly. The sound of LCD went off after 2/3 minutes of its start and after 2/3 minutes picture also went off and verticals lines appeared over the screen. The complainant lodged a complaint with customer care on 16.08.2015 which assured the complainant to rectify the problem within 24 hours. The representative of OP No.2 visited the complainant’s residence on 16.08.2015 and charged Rs.280/- as inspection charges. After inspection, it was told that the main PCB i.e. mother board has developed the defect (Annexure C-2). The complainant requested the representative to get the LCD repaired or replaced the defective part for which he was ready to bear the cost. The complainant also sent an email to Op No.3 and requested to resolve the issue at the earliest. On 01.09.2015, the LCD was taken by OP No.2 to its workshop for its repair vide job sheet dated 01.09.2015 (Annexure C-3).  
7. The grievance of the complainant is that the Op No.2 returned the LCD without repair. The company is supposed to supply the spares parts and provide service for those products for a reasonable life period. The complainant issued legal notice dated 25.08.2015 to the Ops but to no avail. The complainant has also filed duly sworn affidavit (Annexure C-A) in support of the averments made in the course of the complaint.
8. A seller or a manufacturer is duty bound to take steps for the rectification of a defect relatable to their respective fields. The interpretation of the warranty documentation (as also the extended duration thereof) would be relatable only on the point about whether the purchaser making a grievance has to be billed therefor or not. If the defect occurs during the initial or extended warranty period, the purchaser would not be liable to make any payment for the rectification of the defect. However, if the period of protective cover is over, it may be that the purchaser has to pay up. In the current age of consumerism and in the light of prevalence of the Consumer Protection Act as a piece of beneficial/benevolent legislation for the protection of the consumer population, the refrain/refusal on the part of a dealer or a manufacturer to respond to a complaint can safely be nomenclatured as an act of deficiency in service. The contesting OP was, thus, duty bound to respond (in whichever way it wanted) to the mailed complaint of the complainant.
9. Moreover, the Ops appeared but did not file any written statement to contest the claim of the complainant and the defence of Ops was struck off, which draws an adverse inference against them. The non-appearance of the Ops shows that they have nothing to say in their defence or against the allegations made by the complainant. Therefore, the assertions made by the complainant go unrebutted and uncontroverted. As such, the same are accepted as correct and deficiency in service on the part of the Ops is held to have been proved.
10. In view of the above discussion, we are of the opinion that the present complaint deserves to be allowed and the same is accordingly allowed. The Ops are jointly and severally directed as under:-

(i)      To repair the LCD of the complainant and charge the repair cost of parts so replaced.

(ii)     To pay an amount of Rs.3,000/- as compensation for the mental agony, harassment and cost of litigation caused to the complainant.

Let the order be complied with within the period of 30 days from the receipt of certified copy of this order. A copy of this order be sent to the parties free of costs and file be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

 

Announced

05.01.2016      S.P.ATTRI           ANITA KAPOOR                  DHARAM PAL

                        MEMBER            MEMBER                     PRESIDENT

 

Note: Each and every page of this order has been duly signed by me.

 

 

                                 

                                                         DHARAM PAL

                                                          PRESIDENT