M/S METRO REF. & ELECTRONICS V/S ARUN KUMAR MITTAL
ARUN KUMAR MITTAL filed a consumer case on 07 Feb 2018 against M/S METRO REF. & ELECTRONICS in the North East Consumer Court. The case no is CC/206/2016 and the judgment uploaded on 08 Mar 2018.
Delhi
North East
CC/206/2016
ARUN KUMAR MITTAL - Complainant(s)
Versus
M/S METRO REF. & ELECTRONICS - Opp.Party(s)
07 Feb 2018
ORDER
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM: NORTH-EAST
R/o B-172-A, Gali No. 2, Prem Vihar, Karawal Nagar, Delhi-110094
Complainant
Versus
1.
2.
3.
M/s. Metro Ref. & Electronics
1449/7, Loni Road, Durgapuri Chowk,
Delhi-110093
M/s. Godrej & Boce Mfg Co. Ltd.
Pirojshanagar, Vikhroli, Mumbai 400079
M/s. Godrej Bhawan,
Mathura Road, Okhla Phase-III,
New Delhi 110065
Opposite Parties
DATE OF INSTITUTION:
12.08.2016
JUDGEMENT RESERVED ON :
01.02.2018
DATE OF DECISION :
07.02.2018
N.K. Sharma, President
Ms. Sonica Mehrotra, Member
Ravindra Shankar Nagar, Member
ORDER
Present complaint has been filed by the complainant against the aforesaid OP1 to OP3. It has been stated that on 15.06.2015 the complainant had purchased a Godrej Air Conditioner from OP1 for a sum of Rs. 31,500/- vide Invoice No. R-950 dated 15.06.2015 for his residence. The complainant had taken insurance cover from OP for the same after which an extended warranty by way of four years contract was granted to complainant w.e.f. 15.06.2016 till 14.06.2020 with respect to subject AC on payment of Rs. 6205/- paid by complainant to the OP vide cheque no. 126952 drawn on Canara Bank receipt of which was acknowledged by the OPs vide receipt no. 2013510. The complainant stated that on 08.07.2016, i.e. in less than one month of purchase, the Air Conditioner developed technical fault for which the complainant registered a complaint with customer care vide complaint no. D0807222011. In response to the above complaint, it was assured by customer care of OP to repair the faulty AC within 48 hours. On 08.07.2016, 10.07.2016 & 13.07.2016, different engineers visited the residence of the complainant to check the AC but the technical problem could not be repaired. At last, the visiting Engineer of OP3 informed the complainant that the repairing of the A.C. shall take about 7 days. The complainant had made several calls to Customer Care (OP3) about his grievance. Every time, Customer Care (OP3) made false assurance to the complainant that his AC shall be repaired within 2-3 days due to non availability of required spare parts and kept giving alternate numbers to complainant to contact them for his problem. But even after lapse of 32 days the AC could not be repaired. Thereafter, finding no other alternate for redressal of his grievance, the complainant was constrained to file the present complaint praying for issuance of directions to OPs to compensate the complainant to the tune of Rs. 1,00,000/- for humiliation, physical harassment, mental agony and deficiency in service from OP2.
Notices were issued to OP1 but due to its continued non appearance OP1 was proceeded against ex parte on 20.12.2017. Written statement was filed by OP2 & OP3 denying any manufacturing defect in the subject AC as on ground that all ACs go through various quality checks and standards from the OP company before being sold to customers. OP2 and OP3 denied having any privy of contract with the complainant and disputed all allegations made by him summarily and prayed for dismissal of complaint.
Rejoinder was filed by complainant in rebuttal of written statement of OP2 & OP3. Since by admission of their own service engineer the relevant part of AC was not available to repair it being out of stock, the complainant was made to wait indefinitely and his calls were re-routed to various numbers without any solution by the OPs which the complainant stated could also be verified from call detail records.
Evidence by way of affidavit was filed by complainant exhibiting documentary evidence in support of his case. OP2 & OP3 didn’t file any documentary in their rebuttal / defence either with the written statement or with the evidence by way of affidavit.
Written arguments were filed by the complainant as well as OP2 & OP3 and orally addressed as well.
We have heard the arguments.
We have gone through the case file as well as the documents placed on record therein.
We are of the feeling that OP2 & OP3 have failed to establish that there was no technical problem or fault in the A.C. in absence of any documentary proof to this effect which explains why the OPs did not file single document alongwith their written statement and evidence. The OPs have failed to repair the AC to the satisfaction of the complainant despite issuance of four year extended warranty of the A.C. in support of which the complainant has placed on record a copy of invoice of insurance and the OP2 had received an amount of Rs. 6,205/- for the same which fact was not disputed / denied by OPs.
We are, therefore, inclined to grant relief to the complainant against the OP2 and OP3 jointly and severally in the capacity of manufacturer / Insurance Provider and the service centre and also in accordance with the settled law/ legal proposition of both being accountable and liable for each other’s act of omission / commission.
Accordingly, we direct the OP1, OP2 and OP3 as seller, manufacturer / insurer / warranty provider jointly and severally to compensate the complainant as follows:-
To refund to complainant a sum of Rs. 31,500/- as cost of AC and Rs. 6500/- as cost of insurance/ warranty premium, totaling Rs. 38,000/- alongwith interest @9% p.a. from the date of filing of complaint till realization.
We also award a sum of Rs. 5,000/- as compensation towards mental and physical pain and agony
Rs. 2,000/- as litigation cost.
The OPs are directed to comply with the order within a period of 30 days of the receipt of this order.
Let a copy of this order be sent to each party free of cost as per regulation 21 of the Consumer Protection Regulations, 2005.
File be consigned to record room.
Announced on 07.02.2018
(N.K. Sharma)
President
(Sonica Mehrotra)
Member
(Ravindra Shankar Nagar) Member
Consumer Court Lawyer
Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.