BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ERNAKULAM.
Dated this the 29th day of May 2017
(Camp sitting at Muvattupuzha)
Filed on : 26/11/2015
PRESENT:
Shri. Cherian K. Kuriakose, President.
Shri. Sheen Jose, Member.
Smt. Beena Kumari V.K. Member.
CC.No.779/2015
Between
N. Rajgopal, : Complainant
S/o. Sankara Narayana Panicker, (By Adv. Tom Joseph, Court road,
Raj Vihar, Paipra, Manari P.O., Muvattupuzha)
Muvattupuzha.
And
1. M/s. Godrej & boyce Mfg. : Opposite parties
India Ltd., Angel arcade, (1st O.P. By Adv. Sajan Thomas,
Kochi Univrsity P.O., Muvattupuzha)
Kalamassery, Kochi-24,
rep. by its Managing Director.
2. M/s. Kottisarakudiyil agencies, (2nd O.P. By Adv. Reji Paul,
Kacherithazham, Thekkekunnel, Muvattupuzha)
Muvattupuzha—686 661,
Rep. by its Managing Director.
O R D E R
Cherian K. Kuriakose, President.
1. Complainant's case
2. The complainant purchased a refrigerator from the 2nd opposite party dealer, manufactured by the 1st opposite party for an amount of Rs. 12,400/- on 08-09-2011 as per invoice number 763, copy of which is marked as Exbt. A1. The refrigerator had 5 years warranty for the compressor. While so, the refrigerator started mal-functioning and it was therefore sent to the authorized service centre of the 1st opposite party for repairs. The compressor was replaced on 5 different occasions including 04-07-2014, 09-12-2014 and 21-07-2015. The service agent had collected Rs. 2,700/- towards transportation charges on different occasions. Even now the cooling of the fridge is very low and there is no ice formation. The complainant therefore registered a complaint on 02-11-2015 . However, there was no response from the opposite parties. The frequent defects shown by the refrigerator is due to the manufacturing defects. The complainant is therefore entitled to the refund of the price with interest @ 12% and Rs. 10,000/- towards compensation.
3. Notices were issued to the opposite parties. The opposite parties appeared and the 1st opposite party had filed version. The 2nd opposite party did not filed any version.
4. The 1st opposite party in his version contended that after the purchase of the fridge on 20-01-2012 the complainant had booked 6 complaints during the last 4 years and all those complaints were attended to and the spare parts were replaced as per the warranty terms. All the complaints were duly attended and complaint No. 659315 was also offered for repair, however, the complainant did not permit to carry out the repair. The defects alleged were not due to any manufacturing defects. The complainant is not entitled to get any costs and compensation as prayed for and the complaint is therefore sought to be dismissed.
4. When the matter came up for complainant's evidence the complainant filed a proof affidavit and Exbs. A1 to A3 documents were marked. PW1, the complainant was cross-examined by the opposite party. During cross-examination the complainant denied the allegation that the opposite party had offered the repairs in furtherance of the complaint number 659313. However, the complainant admitted that the service personal came and inspected the fridge and found that the thermostat, relay switch and the compressor were faulty and they estimated an amount of Rs. 4,000/- for repairs. PW1 added that the technicians of the opposite party came to the complainant's house for inspection of the fridge only after this complaint was filed before this Forum. The complainant also added that the opposite party had changed the compressor of the fridge 5 times.
5. The opposite party did not adduce any oral or documentary evidence. Exbt. A1 is the photo copy of the retail invoice having number 763 dated 08-09-2011 produced by the complainant to prove the purchase of the fridge from the 2nd opposite party. The 1st repair by replacement of the compressor was on 28-11-2014 as per Exbt. A3. On 21-07-2015 also the compressor was replaced under warranty. On 04-07-2013 as seen from Exbt. A2 the exhaust fan was replaced. T`he complaint of the compressor was also attended to by the opposite parties on 17-11-2014. The complainant filed this complaint on 26-11-2015.
The allegation that the compressor had to be replaced 5 times is not seen supported by any documents. The complainant purchased the fridge on 08-09-2011 and it carried a warranty of 5 years. Therefore at the time of filing the complaint on 26-11-2015, the warranty was in force. The allegation of the complainant was that his complaint dated 02-11-2015 was not attended to by the opposite parties in time.
Even though it has been brought out in evidence that the technicians of the opposite party had inspected the fridge consequent to the complaint No. 659313, the technicians inspected the fridge only after filing this complaint. There was inordinate delay in attending the complaint by the service agents of the 1st opposite party. The demand for Rs. 4,000/- towards the repair charges can not be said to be a fair demand since the warranty continued for 5 years from 08-09-2011. In the above circumstance, we find that the complainant was entitled to get the fridge repaired under warranty as on 02-11-2015. The opposite party has no case that they had repaired the fridge under warranty In the above circumstance, we find that there was deficiency in service on the part of the 1st opposite party in providing sufficient service to the complainant.
In the result, we allow the complaint and direct
the 1st opposite party shall attend the repairs of the fridge purchased by the complainant as per Exbt. A1 invoice, under warranty within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, without demanding any charges for the replacement of the materials covered under warranty as on 02-11-2015 .
The complainant is allowed to realize the costs of the proceedings, which is estimated at Rs. 2,000/- from the opposite party.
Pronounced in the open Forum on this the 29th day of May 2017
Sd/-
Cherian K. Kuriakose, President.
Sd/-
Sheen Jose, Member.
Sd/-
Beena Kumari V.K., Member.
Forwarded/By Order,
Senior Superintendent
Appendix
Complainant's Exhibits
Exbt. A1 : Retail invoice dt. 08-09-2011
A2 : True copy of e-mail dt. 04-07-2013
(series)
A3 : True copy of sale bill dt. 28-11-2014
(series)
Opposite party's exhibits: : Nil
Depositions
PW1 : Rajgopal
Copy of order despatched on:
By Post : By Hand
