| Final Order / Judgement | DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION CAMP COURT AT LUDHIANA RBT/Consumer Complaint No.340 of 2018 Date of institution: 22.05.2018 Date of Decision: 17.05.2022 Nisha Bharti wife of Shri Partap Singh Thakur, resident of House No.139, Singla Enclave, Chandigarh Road, Jandiali, Ludhiana ….Complainant Versus
- M/s Rajat Electronics, Chandigarh Road, opposite Vardhman Spinning & General Mills, Ludhiana through its Manager/Authorized signatory
- IFB Industries Limited, Home Appliances Division L1, Verna Electronic City, Verna Salcete, Goa, India-403722, through its Director/Authorized person
- IFB Appliances Customer Care, G.T. Road, Khanna through its Authorized person
……..Opposite Parties Complaint under Consumer Protection Act Quorum: Shri Ranjit Singh, President. Mrs. Ranvir Kaur, Member Present: Sh. Kamaljeet Koundal, Advocate, for complainant Ops No.1 & 3 exparte Sh. Swarajpal Sooden, Adv.for OP 2
Order dictated by :- Shri Ranjit Singh, President Order The present order of ours will dispose of the above complaint filed under Consumer Protection Act, received by way of transfer from District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Ludhiana by the complainant against the Opposite Parties on the ground that the OP No.1 is the authorized dealer of the Air Conditioner make IFB, Opposite Party No.2 is the manufacturer and opposite party NNo.3 is the service centre of the IFB appliances. The OP No.1 represented to the complainant that OP No.1 deals in IFB Split Air Conditioner etc. and the said Air Conditioners are known in the market because of best quality material and have given satisfactory response to all its customers. Feeling completely satisfied with the assurance given by the opposite party, the complainant purchased IFB Split Air Conditioner vide invoice No.5 dated 1.4.2017 amounting to Rs.39,500/-. At the time of purchase of the said Air Conditioner, the OP gave full warranty/guarantee. It was further assured by the opposite party that the Air Conditioner will give cooling at all modes i.e. fast/medium/slow speed and there will be no change of any complaint of whatsoever nature at any point of time. Even the opposite party No.1 assured that installation of the Air Conditioner will also be provided to the complainant by the complainant at its own level. From the very beginning of its installation, it started giving trouble. The complainant approached to the service centre of the IFB Appliances through various emails but all in vain. Till date, the Air Conditioner in question is faulty condition and the Ops neither repair the same nor refund the amount of the Air Conditioner. The aforesaid act of the opposite parties amounts to deficiency in service, unfair trade practice and it has caused mental as well as physical agony and also caused inconvenience to the complainant. Vide instant complaint, the complainant has sought the following reliefs:- - To replace the Air Conditioner in question with new one or to refund the full amount of the Air Conditioner i.e. Rs.39,500/- to the complainant along with interest @ 18% per annum from the date of invoice till realization.
- To pay Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation to the complainant in the interest of justice.
- To pay Rs.22,000/- as litigation expenses.
- Upon notice, the Ops No.1 & 3 have choosen to remain exparte vide orders dated 09.07.2018 & 08.10.2018.
- Upon notice, the O.P. No.2 has filed written reply taking preliminary objections; that the present complaint is not maintainable; that the complainant has not come to this Hon’ble Commission with clean hands; that the complaint is liable to be dismissed; that the complaint has been filed by the complainant with ulterior motive and malafide intention to cause harassment and prejudice to the OP No.2; that the complainant has suppressed the material facts from this Hon’ble Commission. On merits, it is stated that the OP No.2 has extended the one year warranty over the said product. The OP1 has not extended any warranty terms over the products. The manufacturer i.e. OP No.2 is rendering after sales services directly to the customer. The warranty over the said product had expired. The appliance sold to the complainant, is of highest quality and the complainant has taken delivery of the Air Conditioner, after pre delivery inspection and entire satisfaction and fully complies with the warranties, assurances and specifications, provided for it by the manufacturer, regarding quality and performance of the Air Conditioner. The Air Conditioner in question has been given to the complainant after inspection and his entire satisfaction. The Air Conditioner was sold, to the entire satisfaction of the complainant. The OP No.1 is not the authorized dealer of the OP No.2 rather the OP No.1 is authorized sales point of the IFB Air Conditioners manufactured by the OP No.1. The OP No.1 has not extended any of the warranty and is not authorized/ competent to alter any of the manufacturer’s specifications/warranty term etc. The product is under limited warranty only and guarantee has not been extended over the said product. It is matter of general knowledge that the AC will give cooling on all modes i.e. Fast/Medium/Slow and it was settled that the installation was free. However, the electric work, if required was to be done by the complainant. The technician deputed by the OP No.3 had installed the AC on free of costs to the entire satisfaction of the complainant. There was no complaint in the A.C. The complainant has made concocted and false story against the answering Ops and nor any fault on the part of the answering Ops. Rest of allegations leveled by the complainant have been denied by the Ops and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
- The complainant has tendered various documents in the shape of evidence. On the other hand, the evidence of the OP No.2 is closed by order.
- We have heard learned counsel for the contested parties at considerable length and have also examined the record of the case.
- Admittedly, the complainant purchased one Air Conditioner of IFB from the OP1 vide invoice dated 01.04.2017 by paying an amount to the tune of Rs.39,500/- to OP1. Besides, filing the bill, the complainant has furnished the phemphlate Ex.C2, various correspondence between the complainant and Ops through emails Ex.C3 to Ex.C9 in the shape of evidence in support of his complaint. On the other hand, the OP No.2 have not submitted any cogent evidence in support of their respective versions. Even, the Ops No.1 & 3 have choosen to remain ex-parte.
- It is writ-large on the file that the Air Conditioner of the complainant developed some defect and the OPs were duly contacted by him for the redressal of his grievance with the Ops through email from the very beginning of the purchase of the Air Conditioner. It is also admitted that the complainant had purchased this AC from OP1 by paying an amount of Rs.39500/- vide invoice No.05. There are specific allegations of the complainant that in April, 2017, the AC purchased from OP1 and manufactured by OPs No. 2 & 3 started giving trouble and stopped giving cooling. However, on the other hand, the OPs have specifically alleged that the complainant has filed the present complaint just to harass the OPs.
- Hearing the contentions of the counsel for the parties at length and examining the record, we have come to the conclusion that the Air Conditioner purchased by the complainant started trouble after its purchase and the complainant many times request to the Ops through emails but the OPs not replied at any time. From the evidence on the record, one thing is evident that the A.C. purchased by the complainant gave some problems/troubles. The complainant led evidence on the record, which has proved that his grievance (through emails) was not attended to by the OPs for removing the defect in the A.C. Written version of the OPs has been examined by us and they put up the case of total denial to the evidence of the complainant.
- We find a grain of truth in the evidence of the complainant, otherwise there was no reason for him to file such type of complaint by spending money on this litigation. No person would unnecessarily disturb his peace of mind by resorting to unwarranted and unsolicited litigation. It was a newly purchased A.C. manufactured by the OP Nos. 2 & 3.
- In the absence of any cogent, reliance or confidence inspiring evidence from the side of the OPs, we are of the view that it is possible that the grievance of the CC was not redressed by the OPs to his satisfaction. Accordingly, we allow partly the complaint with the following directions to the Ops No.1 & 2:-
- To repair the Air Conditioner of the complainant as per his satisfaction, in case the Air Conditioner of the complainant is not repairable then replace the same with the new one.
The O.Ps. are also directed to comply with the order jointly and severally within the period of 30 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. Free certified copies of this order be sent to the parties, as per rules. The files be consigned to record room. Announced May 17, 2022 (Ranjit Singh) President (Ranvir Kaur) Member CC No.340 of 2018 PRESENT: Sh. Kamaljeet Koundal, Advocate, for complainant Ops No.1 & 3 exparte Sh. Swarajpal Sooden, Adv.for OP 2 The learned counsel for the OP2 has availed many opportunities for leading evidence, therefore, the evidence of the OP No.2 is closed by order. Arguments completed. Vide our separate detailed order of today, the complaint stands allowed partly. Free certified copies of this order be sent to the parties, as per rules. The files be consigned to record room. May,17 2022 (Ranjit Singh) (Ranvir Kaur) | |
