BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SIRSA.
Consumer Complaint no. 217 of 2018
Date of Institution : 29.8.2018
Date of Decision : 28.05.2019
Madan Lal son of Shri Jaimal Chand, resident of 140 Shiv Chowk, Multani Colony, Sirsa.
……Complainant.
Versus.
- M/s Shri Ram Sales, Opp. Bikaner nursing Home, Circular Road, Sirsa, through its Proprietor/Incharge.
- Customer Care Centre, Whirlpool India Limited through its Incharge Office at Sirsa office at Bhadra Bazar Gali Shanidev Mandir Wali, Sirsa.
- Whirlpool India Private Limited office 28 NIT Faridabad(Haryana 121001) through its Authorized signatory.
Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act,1986.
Before: SHRI R.L. AHUJA…… PRESIDENT
SHRI ISSAM SINGH SAGWAL……MEMBER.
MRS. SUKHDEEP KAUR…….MEMBER.
Present: Sh. Purshotam Phutela, Advocate for complainant.
Sh. Sunny Babbar, Advocate for op no.3.
Op no.1&2 exparte.
ORDER
In brief, the case of complainant is that on 04.05.2016 complainant purchased one refrigerator make Whirlpoor Model 70253 230 Imfresh Roy 4s Silver Bliss vide invoice No.64 dated 04.05.2016 from the op no.1 on cash payment of Rs.15469/- which is the actual price of the refrigerator. The op no.1 at the time of delivery of refrigerator given the guarantee/warrantee for five years and also fully assured that if there would be any manufacturing defect in the refrigerator, the refrigerator would be replaced immediately. Since the day of purchase of refrigerator, there was defect in the refrigerator, as the body of the refrigerator was crack since its delivery and the complainant had already complained the op no.1&2 about the said defect in the refrigerator, but they always assured the complainant that they would replace the refrigerator with new one and also assured the complainant that the company Engineer will pay visit at the house premises of the complainant and thus by making such like assurance, the ops always put-off the complaint of the complainant. Due to cracks in the internal body of refrigerator, the refrigerator of the complainant is not working properly and there is very much low cooling and slow freezing of ice etc. The whole functioning of the refrigerator gone disturbed. Thereafter, the refrigerator was deposited with the op no.2 being the care centre of the company and they after checking the defect in the refrigerator being on account of manufacturing defect within the guaranty period, also assured the complainant for the redressal of the grievance of the complainant, but after kept confined the refrigerator with them for sufficient period, the op no.2 refused to replace the same. the op no.2 also refused to provide the job sheet for the period refrigerator remained with them. It is also important to mention here that since the day of purchase refrigerator was suffering from problem, which only meant that the op no.1 supplied the complainant the defective refrigerator and in this way committed the breach of trust which amount to commission of offence under Section 420/406/120B IPC. The op no.1 has sold the defective refrigerator intentionally in collusion with ops no.2 & 3 and now they all in collusion with each other failed to redress the grievance of the complainant. Hence, this complaint.
2. Opposite party no.1&2 did not appear despite notices and were proceeded against exparte.
On notice, op no.3 appeared and filed written statement in which he has taken preliminary objections and submitted that the contentions and averments made by the complainant in the instant complaint are patently false, vexatious, devoid of any merits and made with the malafide intention of harassing the answering op. It is further submitted that mere reading of the complaints makes it clear that it is nothing but a concocted story to extract illegitimate money from the answering op. The complainant has carelessly cracked the internal side of the refrigerator in question. It is further submitted that as far as duration of warranty is concerned it is for one year comprehensively and for rest of the years only to compressor, not as mentioned by the complainant. The op no.3 is the leading manufacturer of the home appliances in the world further each and every product manufactured by the answering op goes through strick quality tests. There is no question of selling cracked products. Complainant has failed to mention that when he is paying full market price of refrigerator what makes him to buy cracked and defective one. Remaining all the averments made by the complainant are denied by the ops and the complainant is not entitled to get any relief from this Forum against the answering ops and the complaint of the complainant may kindly be dismissed with heavy costs, in the interest of justice.
4. We have heard Ld. counsel for the parties and perused the record carefully.
5. It is admitted fact that complainant purchased one refrigerator make Whirlpoor Model 70253 230 Imfresh Roy 4s Silver Bliss vide invoice No.64 dated 04.05.2016 from the op no.1 on cash payment of Rs.15469/- which is the actual price of the refrigerator. The op no.1 at the time of delivery of refrigerator given the guarantee/warrantee for five years and also fully assured that if there would be any manufacturing defect in the refrigerator, the refrigerator would be replaced immediately.
6. On the other hand op no.3 did not led evidence despite availing number of opportunities and lastly the evidence of op no.3 was closed by order on 27.5.2019. Though the complainant has claimed the replacement of the refrigerator with new one that there is a manufacturing defect in the refrigerator but however, the complainant has not led any evidence of the expert in order to prove the fact that the refrigerator of the complainant suffers from some manufacturing defect. So, no order for replacement can be passed. The complainant has alleged that there are cracks on the body of the refrigerator from the very beginning and he approached the ops with a request to repair and replace but however, the complainant has not placed on record any evidence or any job card regarding approaching the ops for the repair of the product. As per the sale invoice the refrigerator was purchased on 4.5.2016 with a warranty of one year of the refrigerator except the warranty of five years of the compressor. The complainant has not placed on record any copy of the complaint lodged with the ops. The present complaint has been filed by the complainant on 29.8.2018 when the warranty of the refrigerator had already been expired.
In view of the above discussion, the complaint of the complainant is not maintainable and the same is hereby dismissed. A copy of this order be supplied to the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room.
Announced in open Forum. President,
Dated: 28.05.2019. Member Member District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Forum, Sirsa
