Karnataka

Bangalore 4th Additional

CC/13/1054

Mr. Chandra Naik T. - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s. Eureka Forbes Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

Mr.Shiva P:rasad

17 May 2018

ORDER

Complaint filed on: 05.06.2013

                                                      Disposed on: 17.05.2018

 

BEFORE THE IV ADDL DISTRICT

CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BENGALURU

 1^ST FLOOR, BMTC, B-BLOCK, TTMC BUILDING, K.H.ROAD, SHANTHINAGAR, BENGALURU – 560 027    

 

 

CC.No.1054/2013

DATED THIS THE17^thMAY OF2018

PRESENT

 

 

SRI.S.L.PATIL, PRESIDENT

SMT.N.R.ROOPA, MEMBER

 

	Complainant/s	V/s	Opposite party/s
	Chandra Naik.T, Aged about 36 years, S/o Late ThammannaNaik, R/at No.135, 1st Floor, 7th Cross, 22nd Main Road, Govindaraj Nagar, Bangalore-560 072   Presently at No.289, 7th Main, Sampige Layout, Bangalore-79   By Adv.Shivaprasad.E	1	M/s EUREKA FORBES LIMITED., No.183, 3rd Floor, Next to UttamSagar Hotel, Ramamurthy Nagar, Bangalore-560 016. Rep by its Manager.
		2	M/s EUREKA FORBES LIMITED., Having its sales office at No.17/A,  2nd Floor, 1st ‘R’ Block, 20th Main Road, Opp: to HDFC (A.T.M) Rajajinagar, West of Chord Road, Bangalore-560 010. Rep by its Branch Manager Opposite Parties placed Exparte

 

 

PRESIDENT: SRI.S.L.PATIL

1.       This complaint has been filed by the complainant as against the Opposite Parties are jointly and severallydirecting to refund Rs.13,990/- being the amount paid by Complainant for purchase of the installed water purifier with interest at 24% p.a. from 14.5.2012, till date of actual payment, to pay Rs.1,50,000/- being the global compensation towards loss suffered, medical expenses etc., to pay costs of the proceedings.

2.       The brief facts of the case of the Complainant are that the Complainant purchased drinking water purifier called as ‘AG Total Enhance Green RO WP (New) bearing No.1225106326007411 being item code No.GWPDENGNR10000 from the 2^nd Opposite Party manufactured by the 1^st Opposite Party for a total consideration of Rs.13,990/- The Complainant submits that as per the instructions of the executive /officials of the Opposite Parties, he paid amount of Rs.8000/- on 13.5.2012 to the Opposite Parties as advance for purchasing and installing the water purifier at his residence and issued receipt dt.13.5.2012 and the Opposite Parties assuring the Complainant that the water purifier will be installed at his residence on the next day itself i.e. on 14.5.2012.On 14.5.2012, the officials representative of the 2^nd Opposite Party viz., Madhu, Shivu visited to the residence of the Complainant and after collecting the remaining amount towards the purchase of the water purifier from the Complainant and installed the water purifier and upon the request and demand made by the Complainant for issuing necessary bill, receipt for having received the balance amount, warranty card, equipment user guide etc., with respect to the purchase and installation of the water purifier installed at the residence of the Complainant. The aforesaid officials of the Opposite Parties did not issue any document as per the demand of the Complainant, but on the other hand assured the Complainant that the Opposite Parties have the centralized billing system for issuing the necessary documents will be sent to the address of the Complainant through courier service within two weeks from the date of installation and the Complainant believed the assurances and instructions of the officials of the Opposite Parties as the water purifier was installed at his residence. The Complainant submits that when he persistently requested the officials of the Opposite Parties to demonstrate the method for using the equipment and regarding the service with respect to the said equipment of water purifier the officials of the Opposite Parties orally informed the Complainant that the installed water purifier equipment requires to be serviced once in three months and further assured the Complainant that the requisite services at regular intervals will be duly attended by the officials of the service department of the Opposite Parties and also that there will be a regular follow up by the Opposite Parties regarding the same and further orally informed the Complainant that the installed equipment will be provided with free service in all respects by the Opposite Parties for a period of “ONE YEAR” from the date of installation of the water purifier. After the installation of the equipment, the Complainant noticed that the water was bitter in taste and that the equipment was not working properly as assured by the Opposite Parties and hence, the Complainant informed the representatives of the Opposite Party No.2 regarding the defects and shortcomings in the equipment in the process of purifying the drinking water and hence, after bringing the said shortcomings with respect to the performance of the installed equipment to the notice of the said service executives of the 2^nd Opposite Party requested and demanded for replacement of the said machine or to carryout necessary repairs by providing due service as assured by them for ensuring good performance of the installed equipment, so as to enable the Complainant and his family members to get a health drinking water.Inspite of several requests, reminders and demands made by the Complainant, the service engineer of the Opposite Parties visited to the residence of the Complainant on 24.5.2012 and after hearing to all the complaints with respect to the shortcomings of the said equipment, informed the Complainant that the said defect might be for having installed “high TDS Lower Brain candle” instead of low TDS lower brain candle and as such the said service engineer only replaced a candle with a ‘new low TDS lower brain” and once again assured the Complainant that he has rectified the mistakes with respect to the said equipment and orally instructed the Complainant that after installing new candle of the required range, the process for rectifying the mistake will necessarily take two days’ time to get itself set right and such assured Complainant to wait until two days and to consume the water after two days. Even after having waited for two days also, the mistake with respect to the performance of the installed equipment of water purifier did not improve in any manner as such the Complainant once again approached the Opposite Parties on 15.6.2012 and requested the Opposite Parties to replace the installed equipment with a new equipment or in the alternative to carry out necessary repairs and to give due service with respect to the complaint as per their assurances given prior to purchase and installation of the equipment. Inspite of several requests and demands made by the Complainant, the Opposite Parties have failed to attend to the complaints. The Complainant having no other options to get his grievance approached Euro Help Line Centre No.39883333 and lodged several complaints i.e.complaint dt.15.6.2012, 21.8.2012, 20.1.2013, 1.3.2013 vide complaint bearing No.87094258, 87500170, 88098079, 70416202 and inspite of the complaints having been registered by the Complainant, the Opposite Parties did not give acknowledgments for the registration of the said complaints and did not give either any response or any service and the complaints lodged by the Complainant remained unattended and there is a total deficiency of service in providing due service to the Complainant by the Opposite Parties. Further the Complainant also registered reminder complaints and requested the Opposite Parties to rectify the defects of the water purifier installed by them and also demanded for furnishing the necessary documents i.e.invoice, bill, receipt, warranty card, equipment user guide, manual etc., which were required to have been furnished bythe Opposite Parties as per the assurance of the officials of the Opposite Parties within 2 weeks from the date of installation i.e. on 14.5.2012 and Opposite Parties had failed to furnish the said necessary documents even until 2.2.2013 for taking necessary action with respect to deficiency of service with respect to performance of the installed equipment. Apart from the several requests registered to the Euro helpline, the Complainant has been made to unnecessarily suffer from several problems for no fault on his part.  Once again the Complainant lodged a complaint to the Euro Helpline dt.2.3.2013 requesting them to furnish the necessary documents, but the Opposite Parties have intentionally and completely ignored the requests and complaints made by the Complainant. After registering the complaint dt.2.3.2013, one of the service engineer of the Opposite Parties visited to the residence of the Complainant and demanded for the bill and the warrantycard with respect to the said installed equipment for providing service to the equipment for rectifying the defects of the water purifier and when the Complainant informed the said service engineer that the bill and the warranty card is not yet furnished by the Opposite Parties, the said service engineer refused to attend and provide service to the said installed equipment on the ground that he is not permitted to provide service in the absence of the bill and the warranty card issued by the Opposite Parties and the said service engineer did not attend to the complaints of the Complainant and even till today also the Complainant is not able to make use of the said installed water purifier. The Complainant having no other option except to approach this forum was trying to all necessary informations and details, all of a sudden, the Complainant has been served with a cover on 6.3.2013 through Professional Couriers sent by the Opposite Parties whereby the Opposite Parties have furnished only the copy of the tax invoice bearing No.7012101850 said to have been raised on 4.7.2012 and there is an inordinate delay of more than for 8 months for serving the said copy to the Complainant with respect to the water purifier purchased and installed on 14.5.2012 and the Opposite Parties have filed to furnish all the required documents and have furnished only the tax invoice.  The Opposite Parties have intentionally not furnished the necessary tax invoice within two weeks from the date of installation of the equipment so as to enable the Complainant to avail the service and on the other hand have delayed the process of furnishing the documents only with a malafide reason to see that the period of free service said to be provided for the equipment for a period of one year from the date of installation to get elapsed and the Complainant has been kept in darkness with respect to the warranty period of the water purifier purchased by the Complainant. The copy of the tax invoice dt.4.7.2012 sent by the Opposite Parties through professional courier received by the Complainant on 6.3.2013. Inspite of having got purchased and got installed the water purifier from the Opposite Parties by paying Rs.13,990/- as on 13.4.2012 and 14.5.2012, the Complainant and his family members have been constrained to drink unpurified water in view of defective water purifier installed by the Opposite Parties which had remained unattended due to negligence on the part of the Opposite Parties without providing any service with respect to the installed water purifier. On 13.5.2013, the Complainant shifted the residence to the new address and once again approached the Opposite Parties and requested them to provide service to the installed equipment for shift it to the new residential premises and to rectify the shortcomings in the said installed equipment and the Complainant was constrained to continue in the said premise for more than 15 days even after shifting all the other house hold articles except the installed water purifier equipment installed by the Opposite Parties and for which the Complainant has been compelled to pay the compensation towards extended period with respect to the delay for handing over the vacant possession of the rented premises to the landlord whereby the Complainant has been put to mental agony and financial loss and subsequently, one of the executive has come to the Complainant and has only shifted the equipment without providing proper service to the said equipment and the same has remained unattended and serviced till today at the new residential premise. The Complainant submits that installed water purifier which has been manufactured by the 1^stOpposite Party and sold and installed by the 2^nd Opposite Party is not working properly and correctly and inspite of several complaints registered with the Opposite Parties has remained unattended without any service provided by the Opposite Parties as required and thereby the Opposite Parties have compelled the Complainant not to make use of the said equipment inspite of having purchased the same for a valuable consideration and price and thereby the Complainant is not able to get purified water from the installed equipment for himself and his family members from the day one of its purchase and till today the Opposite Parties have not furnished the Complainant with the warranty card with respect to the said installed equipment and as such, it is clearly evident that there is a manufacturing defect in the said installed water purifier.  Hence, the Complainant having no other option for getting his grievance redressed is filing this complaint seeking for refund of the amount. Hence, this complaint.

3. Notices were ordered to issue to the Opposite Parties. Inspite of notice duly served on the them, did not appear, hence placed exparte.

4.The Complainant to substantiate his case, filed his affidavit evidence. Though he has produced the documents at Sl.No.1 to4 dt.5.6.2013, but did not get marked. The Complainant has filed his written arguments and also heard the learned counsel for the Complainant.

          5.       The points that arise for our consideration are:

          1) Whether the complainant proves the deficiency in service on the 

part of the OPs, if so, whether heis entitled for the relief sought

for?

 

          2) What Order?

 

          6.Our answers to the above points are as under:

 

Point No.1 :Affirmative

Point No.2 :As per the final order for the following

 

REASONS

          7. POINT NO.1:    In the instant case the 1^st Opposite Party is the manufacturer and the 2^nd Opposite Party is the seller. We have already briefly stated the contents of the complaint. To deny the claim of the Complainant, none of the Opposite Parties did appear to contest the claim by way of filing the version. Under such circumstances, non-appearance/non-filing of the version, amounts to an admission with regard to the grievance of the complainant,in the light of decision reported in 2018 (1) CPR 314 (NC) in the case of M/s Singla Builders & Promoters Ltd., V/s Aman Kumar Garg.Anyhow we placed reliance on available materials on record as to know whether any deficiency on the part of the Opposite Parties in respect of the problems of the drinking water purifier called‘AG Total Enhance Green RO WP (New)’. In this context, the Complainant has made to approach the Opposite Parties. None of them to get redress his remedy. In respect of purchasing the said water purifier is concerned, the Complainant has produced document No.3 i.e.tax invoice dt.04.7.2012 for an amount of Rs.13,990/-. He has also approached Euro Help Line Centre No.39883333 and lodged several complaints i.e.complaint dt.15.6.2012, 21.8.2012, 20.1.2013, 1.3.2013 vide complaint bearing No.87094258, 87500170, 88098079, 70416202. But the Opposite Parties did not respond properly. The date of invoice is 4.7.2012, the complaint wasfiled on 5.6.2013. Hence, the complaint filed by the Complainant is within the time.Further, the alleged defect was found within warranty period. Hence, we are of the opinion that if the Opposite Parties 1 and 2 are directed to get repaired the said water purifier or else to refund the amount covered under the tax invoice for an amount of Rs.13,990/- with cost of litigation of Rs.1000/-, ends of justice would meet sufficiently. Accordingly, we answer the Point No.1 in the affirmative. 

8.       POINT NO.2:In the result, we proceed to pass the following:

ORDER

The complaint filed by the Complainant is hereby allowed.The Opposite Parties 1 and 2 are jointly and severally liable to repair the said water purifier called ‘AG Total Enhance Green RO WP (New) bearing No1225106326007411 or else to refund an amount of Rs.13,990/- within 6 weeksfrom the date of receipt of this Order. Failing which, the said amount carries interest at 6% p.a. Cost of litigation is fixed at Rs.1000/-.

Supply free copy of this order to both the parties.

          (Dictated to the Stenographer, got it transcribed, typed by her/him and corrected by me, then pronounced in the open forum on 17^thMay2018).

(ROOPA.N.R)     MEMBER	(S.L.PATIL)  PRESIDENT

 

         

1. Witness examined on behalf of the complainant/s by way of affidavit:

Chandra Naik.T, who being the complainant was examined.

Copies of Documents produced on behalf of Complainant/s:

 

Doc-1	Copy of the receipt dt.13.5.2012
Doc-2	Copy of the service request activity report
Doc-3	Copy of the tax invoice received by the Complainant on 6.3.2013
Doc-4	Copy of the courier cover received on 6.3.2013

 

(ROOPA.N.R) MEMBER

(S.L.PATIL) PRESIDENT