Tamil Nadu

North Chennai

4/2013

P.U.Ajith Kumar, - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s.L.G.Electronics (I) Ltd, - Opp.Party(s)

M/s.Rajinish Pathyil

07 Apr 2016

ORDER

                                                           Complaint presented on  :  14.12.2012

                                                                Order pronounced on  :  07.04.2016

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (NORTH)

    2^nd Floor, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C.Nagar, Park Town, Chennai-3

 

PRESENT: THIRU.K.JAYABALAN, B.Sc., B.L.,        PRESIDENT

                    TMT.T.KALAIYARASI, B.A.B.L.,           MEMBER II

 

THURSDAY THE 07^th  DAY OF APRIL 2016

 

C.C.NO.04/2013

 

 

Mr.P.U.Ajith Kumar,

Sanjeevini Apt.

6F, Block No.2,

72/1, LB Road,

Thiruvanmiyur,

Chennai – 600 041.

                                                                             ..... Complainant

 

..Vs..

	1.M/S. L.G Electronics (I) Pvt. Ltd., A411 2nd Avenue Fatima Tower, Anna Nagar West, Chennai – 40.   2. M/S.LG Electronics, Plot No.51, Surajpur Kasna Road, Greater Noida – 201 306, Uttar Pradesh.
	...Opposite Parties

Date of complaint                                  : 04.01.2013

Counsel for Complainant                      : M/S. Rajnish Pathiyil

Counsel for Opposite Parties                   : Mothilal, Goda & Kalliat

 

O R D E R

 

BY PRESIDENT THIRU. K.JAYABALAN B.SC., B.L.,

          This complaint is filed by the complainant u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.1986.

1. THE COMPLAINT IN BRIEF:

          The  Complainant obtained the warranty coverage for the product LED Model 32LE5500, by paying Rs.6,563/- by cheque No.788936 dated 05.12.2011 drawn at Corporation Bank, against the AMC provided by the 1^st Opposite Party herein under its Happy Living Plan vide HLP No.IK036375 dated 05.12.2011,  having warranty coverage for a period of two years from 05.12.2011 to 04.12.2013. A month after receiving the warranty cover the television stopped working, and the Complainant immediately registered a Complaint with the Customer Care Centre of the Opposite Parties herein on 19.01.2012 vide Complaint No.RNA 120119004873 reporting the non-functioning of the Television set.  The service dealer, on receiving the Complaint dated 19.01.2012, attended the Complaint and informed the Complainant that the problem was in the “Board” of the television and since there were no parts available to make the necessary repairs they were unable to do the same. The Complainant then requested for a replacement for the set, but these requests went unheard. Even after several calls made by the Complainant to the Customer Care Service Centre regarding the progress in finding a viable replacement for the malfunctioning television set or at the very least. Replacing the nonfunctional part with one in a working condition, there was absolutely no response from them in attending to the issue. The Complainant had to suffer much agony as he could not use the Television set for more than three months, inspite of spending an additional amount of Rs.6,563/- for warranty cover for 2 years. The service dealer assigned with the work attended the Complaint and reported that there was a problem  with the “Board” and that repairs could not be carried out immediately as there was no ready stock available.  A notice, informing the grievance of the Complainant has been sent to the Opposite Parties was received by them.  As there was no response from the Opposite Parties, on 14.07.2012, the Complainant was constrained to issue a legal notice to the Opposite Parties and after receiving the same no reply from Opposite Parties. Hence the Complaint is filed.

2. WRITTEN VERSION OF THE OPPOSITE PARTIES IN BRIEF:

          The Opposite Party submits that LED Television Set was purchased by the Complainant from Bangkok, Thailand as admitted by the Complainant without any bill of purchase, cover of warranty or maintenance. As per the terms & policies of the Opposite Parties, AMC ought not to have been granted to any product not manufactured in India. Notwithstanding the same, on mere perusal of the AMC form filed by the Complainant would go to show images, remote and modes of the LED Television purchased by the Complainant alone are covered. This being the case, the Complainant demands that the board of the LED Television be replaced free of cost which is not possible. In any  event the LED Television set purchased by the Complainant abroad would not entitle for  the   replacement of any part, the same not being managed in India. The Opposite Parties are not guilty of any Deficiency in Service and any mental agony suffered by the Complainant is solely due to the Complainant’s acts as mentioned above. Hence the Opposite Parties  prays to dismiss the Complaint.

3. POINTS FOR CONSIDERATION:

          1. Whether this Forum has jurisdiction to entertain this Complaint?

          2.Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties?

          3.Whether the complainant is entitled to any relief? If so to what relief?

4. POINT:1

          The admitted facts are that the Complainant purchased a LED Television  from Bangkok, Thailand manufactured by L.G. Electronics  and after brought the product to India, the Complainant entered with the Ex.A1 and A4  Annual maintenance contract and with the 1^st Opposite Party, by paying an amount of Rs.6,563/-.

          5. The Opposite Parties 1^st objection is that this Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain this Complaint, since the product was purchased abroad. In Ex.A4 Terms & Condition of the AMC it is specifically stated that “All disputes are subject to New Delhi Jurisdiction”. However the said AMC entered at Chennai by the 1^st Opposite Party with the Complainant, within the jurisdiction of this Forum. Therefore part of cause of action arose within the jurisdiction of this Forum and hence we accept that the Complaint is maintainable in this Forum.

6. POINT:2

          Ex.A1, AMC, Happy living plan was entered on 0.12.2011 for a period of 2 years. According to the Complainant, he made a Complaint to the 1^st Opposite Party on 19.01.2012 that the Television is not working and the 1^st Opposite Party/service dealer attended the problem and stated that the problem was with the Board of the Television and no parts available to make repairs. The Complainant further argued that as per clause 15 & 16 of AMC (Ex.A4) covers board (PCB –Printed Circuit Board) and therefore 1st Opposite Party at free of cost should have changed the board. The Opposite Parties relied that Ex.A1 is the specific agreement of the AMC, wherein it is agreed that the AMC covers only for the parts image, remote and models and not other parts and therefore the Complaint is liable to be rejected.

          7. Ex.A1 contains several products manufactured by the LG & Co., and one of the products mentioned therein is LED, which is Television and in that tick Mark shown for the spares image, remote and models and only for those there spares covered by AMC. All other products and parts were scored out. Further, PCB (Printed Circuit Board) not mentioned for LED (TV) in Ex.A1. Whereas other products in Ex.A1 contains the name of PCB as spare.  Therefore the clause 15 & 16 of the terms and condition are not applicable in favour of the Complainant, since the spares mentioned in Ex.A1 does not include board (PCB). Therefore the Opposite Party refused to change the PCB on the cover of AMC is sustainable and hence it is held that the Opposite Party has not committed any Deficiency in Service.

8. POINT:3

          Since the Opposite Parties have not committed any Deficiency in Service, the Complainant is not entitled for any relief in the Complaint and the same is liable to be dismissed.

          In the result the Complaint is dismissed. No costs.

          Dictated to the Steno-Typist transcribed and typed by her corrected and pronounced by us on this 07^th   day of April 2016.

 

MEMBER – II                                                               PRESIDENT

LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE COMPLAINANT:

Ex.A1 dated 05.12.2011                AMC for Television for the period 05.12.2011 to

                                              04.12.2013

 

Ex.A2 dated 05.04.2012                 Letter of Complaint sent to M/S LG Electronics

                                              Chennai along with courier receipts

 

Ex.A3 dated 06.07.2012                 Legal Notice sent by the Complainant to the

                                                  Opposite Parties along with postal receipts, tracking

                                               evesnt, and acknowledgement

 

Ex.A4 dated 05.12.2011                 AMC Termed as Happy Living Plan Contains

                                              Terms and condition of warranty

 

LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE OPPOSITE PARTIES:

                                        …… NIL …..

 

MEMBER – II                                                               PRESIDENT