Case No. 230/2022   

IN THE MATTER OF

Dr. Lal Singh Prop. Anita Nursing near Quarasi BijaliGhar, Aligarh  

                                                         V/s

1. M/s Snow Cool Tiraha Parav Dubey Agra Road, Aligarh by Prop./Manager
2. Mitsubishi IAPL House 2/8 west Patel Nagar Metro Station New Delhi

CORAM

 Present:

1. Shri Hasnain Qureshi, President
2. Shri Alok Upadhayay, Member
3. Smt. Purnima Singh Rajpoot, Member

PRONOUNCED by Shri Hasnain Qureshi, President

JUDGMENT

1. The present complaint has been filed by the complainant before this commission for  the following reliefs-

1. The Op be directed to replace the AC by the new AC or to pay amount Rs.51500 with interest.
2. The Op be directed to pay compensation Rs.200000 for mental agony.
3. The Op be directed to pay litigation expenses Rs.20000/.

2. The Complainant has stated that Op no.2 is the manufacturer of the Ac and the Op no.1 is authorized dealer. Complainant had purchase a Ac from Op no.1 Rs. 51500 through invoice 28.3.2022 but the AC became defected after five month of purchase and was not providing cooling. Complainant made continuously till 7.11.2022 but the AC was not repaired.  
3. Op no.1 submitted in WS that he had given an AC to the complainant which was in working order. The service and replacements of the part are given by the company and he has left the dealership on 1.6.2022. Now the company have to discharge the liability.
4. Op no.2 submitted in WS that the complainant did not follow the terms and conditions of the warranty and the defective part cannot be replace. The product was not installed by the authorized service provider and there was no idea of installer credibility and knowledge. The OP can provide necessary spare part to make the unit work if the complainant issue. If the complainant share the certification of installer.      
5. Complainant has filed his affidavit and papers in support of his pleadings. Ops have also filed affidavit in support of their pleadings.
6. We have perused the material available on record and heard the parties counsel.
7. The first question of consideration before us is whether the complainant is entitled to any relief?
8. Complainant has alleged that the AC became defective after 5 months of its installation and it was within the period of warranty. Complainant has deposed that the OP no.1 did not provide the facility of installation of the Ac and therefore he had to get the installation by some other person. It is clear that the complainant had to get the services of other person under compelling circumstances. Complainant cannot be blaimed for voilance of any such condition of the warranty. Complainant has also deposed that none attended to provide the services on complaint made by him. Under the circumstances it is just and proper to direct the OP to replace the AC by new AC or  to pay the price of AC with pendente lite  and future interest @12% per annum.
9. The question formulated above is decided in favour of the complainat.
10. We hereby direct the Ops to replace Ac by new AC within a month or to pay the price of AC Rs 51500 with pendente lite and future interest @12% per annum. OPs shall also pay to the complainant Rs.10000/for litigation expenses.
11. Ops shall comply with the direction within 30 days failing which Ops shall be prosecuted for non-compliance in accordance with section 72 of the Act for awarding punishment against him.
12. A copy of this judgment be provided to all the parties as per rule as mandated by Consumer Protection Act, 2019. The judgment be uploaded forthwith on the website of the commission for the perusal of the parties.
13. File be consigned to record room along with a copy of this judgment.