By Smt. C.S. Sulekha Beevi, President,

1. Complainant purchased an L.G. Split AC – Model No.LSL.1269QC from 2^nd opposite party on 20-4-2004. The said model was purchased by complainant on the representations made by the sales personel of 2^nd opposite party that the model has facility of jet cool operation by which the room temperature will come to 18ºC within a time span of 30 minutes. The price of the AC was Rs.27,500/- and complainant paid Rs.30,500/- in total including cost of accessories necessary for installation 2^nd opposite party explained the jet cool facility by referring to page 11 of the Owners manual. After installation complainant tried to activate/operate the jet cool operation into action but failed. He informed the non-functioning of jet col system to 2^nd opposite party. On 23-6-2004 a technician from second opposite party came and inspected the system. In spite of efforts the technician could not put the jet cool system into operation. On 25-6-2004 another attempt was made but that also failed. The system supplied by opposite parties could set temperature at 21ºC in 5 hours. This fact was realized by the service engineers. Opposite parties have not been able to repair the system and rectify the defect. Opposite parties have cheated the complainant by falsely representing about the facility of jet cool operation in the AC. Complainant issued a lawyer notice to opposite parties to take back the AC and refund the amount with 12% interest and to pay compensation. To this reply notice was issued by opposite parties in which they have raised false and baseless explanations to the defect of jet cool function. The act of opposite parties amounts to unfair trade practice and deficiency in service. Hence this complaint claiming refund of Rs.30,500/- with 12% interest and compensation of Rs.50,000/-.

2. Though 1^st and second opposite parties appeared through counsel, version was filed by first opposite party who is the manufacturer. Opposite party admits the purchase of L.G. Split AC Model having jet cool facility. The averment that opposite party explained to the complainant that as a result of jet cool operation the temperature in the room will come to 18ºC within 30 minutes is denied. That complainant who is an educated person had admitted that he was shown the details of ’jet cool’ operation in the Owners Manual by second opposite party. In the Owners Manual it is clearly stated that in the ’jet cool’ mode very quick and fast cooling is done. The unit will continue to supply high velocity air for 30 minutes setting the room temperature automatically to 18ºC. It is further stated in the manual that after 30 minutes unit will supply air at the default fan speed whether or not the temperature in the room has reached 18ºC. That the operation of jet cool mode is very clear from the second limb of the statement in the Owners Manual. By jet cool system/mode it only means/says that the AC will work continuously for half an hour in the maximum cooling mode so as to attain the lowest temperature within the minimum time. The setting of the room temperature depends on the heat load of the particular room depending on the size of the room, number of doors and windows, the frequency of opening the doors, the number of persons inside the room etc. The complainant being an educated person is supposed to understand these facts and also understand the operation of ’jet cool’ as stated in the manual. It is admitted that the Owners Manual was shown to him at the time of purchase of the AC. Therefore there is no false representation or misrepresentation. That there is no defect to the AC as the complainant has no complaint other than misunderstanding of the operation of the jet cool mode provided in the system. That complainant is not entitled to any reliefs.

3. Evidence consists of the affidavit filed by complainant and Exts.A1 to A4 marked for him. Opposite party No.1 filed counter affidavit. No documents marked for opposite parties. Either side did not seek any opportunity for adducing oral evidence and has not adduced any oral evidence.

4. Points for consideration:-

(i) Whether opposite parties have committed any unfair trade practice or deficiency in service.

(ii) If so reliefs and costs.

 

5. Point (i):-

The grievance of the complainant is that the said model AC was purchased by him only on the representations made by opposite parties that the jet col system provided in the AC would bring the room temperature to 18ºC within 30 minutes of it’s functioning. In the affidavit the complainant has stated that the AC did not function after installation. This contention is totally inconsistent with his pleadings and averments in Ext.A4 notice where the grievance is limited to the complaint regarding the operation of the jet cool system.

6. The complaint is resisted by opposite parties contending that the complaint has evolved only from misunderstanding of the function of jet cool system. In page 11 of Ext.A2 Owners Manual the details of jet cool system is provided with pictures. It is stated as under:

“Note :

During the JET COOL function at any moment, the A/C starts to blow the cool air at extremely high speed for 30 minutes setting the room temp. automatically to 18ºC. It is especially used to col the room temp. in the shortest time in a hot sumer.

In heat pump mode or neuro fuzzy mode however, the JET COOL function is not available.

In order to return to the normal cooling mode from the JET COOL mode, you just press either the operation mode selection button, airflow volume selection or temp. setting button or the JET COOL button again.”

7. It is clear that the jet cool mode is intended to speed cooling initially. This is done by the system, by blowing cool air at extremely high speed for 30 minutes and setting the room temperature to 18ºC. It does not continue to hold the temperature inside the room at 18ºC. The operation is only for 30 minutes. It is very much clear that complainant has raised the allegation without properly understanding the function of jet cool operation. We have to hold that there was no false representation or misrepresentation since the complainant who is a doctor by profession admittedly was shown the Owners Manual to explain the operation. Further, more than five years have elapsed after the purchase of the AC. Complainant has not specifically stated in the affidavit whether he is still using the AC. Moreover no steps were taken by the complainant to prove the allegation of defect alleged by him. In the absence of expert evidence to prove the allegation of defects, which the complainant could have procured, it is not possible to appreciate the contentions of defects to the jet cool system. Complainant has failed to establish a case in his favour.

8. In the result we dismiss the complaint. No order as to costs.

Dated this 8th day of September, 2009.

Sd/-

C.S. SULEKHA BEEVI, PRESIDENT

Sd/-

MOHAMMED MUSTAFA KOOTHRADAN, Sd/-

MEMBER E. AYISHAKUTTY, MEMBER

APPENDIX

Witness examined on the side of the complainant : Nil

Documents marked on the side of the complainant : Ext.A1 to A4

Ext.A1 : Photo copy of the Cash bill for Rs.30,500/- from second opposite party to complainant.

Ext.A2 : Room Air Conditioner Owner’s Manual.

Ext.A3 : Service report by second opposite party to complainant.

Ext.A4 : Photo copy of the lawyer notice issued by complainant’s counsel to opposite parties.

Witness examined on the side of the opposite parties : Nil

Documents marked on the side of the opposite parties : Nil

Sd/-

C.S. SULEKHA BEEVI, PRESIDENT

Sd/-

MOHAMMED MUSTAFA KOOTHRADAN, Sd/-

MEMBER E. AYISHAKUTTY, MEMBER