Smt. Sangita Paul, Member

This is a case filed by Sri. Ajoy Kumar Chakraborti, S/o. Late Anadi Bhusan Chakraborti residing at Village & P.O. – Champahati, District- South 24 Parganas, Pin – 743 330 against Naskar Enterprise with a prayer for directing the OP to repair the refrigerator which is of regular use, immediately, to pay cost of Rs.10,000/- for harassment, to pay Rs.10,000/- as litigation cost.

The OP is Naskar Enterprise, the authorized service centre of Voltas.  The address is South Kalyanpur, Baruipur, near Byepass BBadal Bar, Kolkata-700 144.  

The complainant is a peace loving and law abiding citizen. The complainant by filing this case states that the complainant bought a Voltas Refrigerator.  But the Refrigerator stated giving problem.  It remained out of order for few days.  The complainant went to the service centre of Voltas Refrigerator and informed that his refrigerator had been out of order and he also paid Rs.472/- as repairing charge.  He paid the amount on 14.07.2021.  It was the service charge of the said refrigerator.  The service centre Naskar Enterprise received money from the complainant but did not repair the same.  The complainant informed but the refrigerator was not repaired.  The complainant suffered for unfair trade practice adopted by the OP. 

The cause of action arose on 14.07.2021 and it was continuing day by day. 

That the complaint filed is within the jurisdiction of the Ld. Commission.  The complainant suffered for the unfair trade practice and deficiency in service adopted by the OP. 

The complainant prays for an order directing the OP to repair the refrigerator, which is of regular use, immediately, to pay compensation to the tune of Rs.10,000/- for harassement and anxiety, to pay litigation cost of Rs.10,000/-.

The OP by filing written version states that the complainant purchased a Voltas Refrigerator of 320 litre on 15.05.2019 from a local electronics –store.  The complainant called the mechanic for repairing on 14.07.2021.  The engineer of the OP visited and checked the problem on the same day.  The Engineer found cooling refrigerant was not working.  The Engineer asked the complainant if the complainant agreed to spend for the cooling refrigerant.  The Engineer charged Rs.472/- as service charge as per the company policy and gave him the bill on 14.07.2021.  The complainant wanted to know the charge of repairing after knowing the charge.  He was not ready to pay for the same. He did not inform anything to the OP.  After five months the complainant called on 27.12.2021.  The complainant informed the OP that he had lodged a complaint against the service centre for harassment.  The complainant did not contact with the OPs.  Though the OP tried to contact with the complainant.  The OP asked if they are ready to pay for the repairing charge the complainant did not inform anything to the OP. 

The OP states that considering the above circumstances, it is very much clear that the complaint against him for harassment is baseless.  The OP categorically denies all the allegations framed against him.  The OP is also ready for negotiation. 

That the instant complaint was filed on 03.09.2021.  The case was admitted on 21.09.2021.  On 18.01.2022 Op files W/V.  On 22.03.2022 the complainant files show cause.  On 17.08.2022 the complainant files questionnaire.  But it was the questionnaire of a different case.  On 22.09.2022 the complainant files questionnaire and copy served.  On 04.11.2022, the OP files reply.  Copy served.  On 13.02.2023 argument of the OP was heard.  The complainant took no steps.  Accordingly, we proceeded for giving judgement. 

 Points for consideration :-

1. Is the complainant, a consumer?
2. Is the OP guilty of deficiency in service and unfair trade practice?
3. Is the complainant entitled to get relief as prayed for?

Decision with reasons :-

Point No.1  :- 

On perusal of documents and records, it appears that the complainant purchased a Voltas Refrigerator on 15.05.2019.  It was giving good service, there was no problem.  Meanwhile, the Refrigerator started giving problem and the complainant informed the Voltas Service Centre and paid Rs.472/-, on 14.07.2021 to the OP Naskar Enterprise.  Rs.472/- was paid by the complainant as service charge.  So it appears that the complainant is a consumer u/s 2(7) of the C. P. Act., 2019.

Point No.2  :- 

            The complainant’s refrigerator was not working properly.  So the complainant informed the Voltas-Service-Centre.  OP informed that there was a problem of cooling refrigerant.  The Complainant was informed but the complainant was not ready to bear the cost.  The complainant purchased the refrigerator two years ago, on 15.05.2019.  The complainant used the refrigerator for two years.  The complainant faced no problem at that time.  On 14.07.2021 the complainant detected a problem in his refrigerator and called the mechanic.  The mechanic inspected the refrigerator and found that the cooling refrigerant was not working properly. The OP gave an estimate, but the complainant was not in a position to pay for the same.  If the complainant paid the charge the problem would be solved by the OP.  The complainant lodged a case at DCDRC, Baruipur.  The OP was ready for negotiation. Still the complainant did not contact with the OP.  As a result, we find no deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OP.  Hence, the 2^nd point is not decided in favour of the complainant , rather it is decided in favour of the OP. 

Point No.3  :- 

            The complainant purchased Voltas-320 litre-Refrigerator.  The Date of purchase was 15.05.2019.  The complainant faced problem after two years.  The complainant informed the Service Centre on 14.07.2021.  The mechanic inspected the refrigerator.  The complainant paid Rs.472/- as service charge.  After inspecting the refrigerator, the mechanic informed that the cooling refrigerant was not working.  But the complainant was not ready to pay the charge.  No question of repairing the refrigerator arises.  The service centre works against the charge and the complainant did not pay for repairing.  OP has nothing to do with the problem. So the problem persisted.  Hence, it appears that the complainant is not harassed by the OP. So, the 3^rd point is decided in favour of the OP.

            In the result, the complaint case fails.   

Hence, it is,

                                                                       ORDERED

That the complaint case be and the same is dismissed against the OP.

There is no order as to cost. 

Let a copy of the order be supplied to the parties concerned free of cost.

That the final order will be available in the following website:www.confonet.nic.in.

Dictated and corrected by me

                    Sangita Paul

Member