Delhi

East Delhi

CC/353/2013

RANJAN KUMAR - Complainant(s)

Versus

Navrang Audio Video Pvt. Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

13 Aug 2013

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM (EAST)

GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI

CONVIENIENT SHOPPING CENTRE, SAINI ENCLAVE: DELHI-92

 

CC. NO-353/13

In the matter of:

Sh. Ranjan Kumar

WB-53, Krishna Mandir Marg,

Shakarpur, Delhi-110092

          Complainant

 

Vs

 

1. M/s Navrang Audio Video (P) Ltd.

D-10, Laxmi Nagar, Vikas Marg, Delhi-110092

 

2. M/s Sharp Business Systems (India) Limited

214-221, Ansal Tower 38 Nehru Place, New Delhi-110019

 

                                                                                                                    Opposite Parties

 

                                                                                                DATE OF ADMISSION-03/06/2013

                                                                                                 DATE OF ORDER       -14/12/2015

 

ORDER

 

SH. N.A.ZAIDI, PRESIDENT

This complaint has been filed with the allegation that the complainant purchased a five star rating Refrigerator of Whirlpool on 10/06/2012 for a sum of Rs.19,300/-. When it was delivered at his residence, it was double door Model No. SJ-K-35S of two star rating instead of 3 star rating and without any warranty card. The same was communicated to the Respondent. It was directed by the respondent that the Service Engineer will visit the house for demo and they restrict to use of the Refrigerator. When Service Engineer visited the house of the complainant and noticed this fact he asked the Complainant to approach the Respondent No.1Navrang Audio Video. Respondent No.1 on the visit of the Complainant provided the warranty card but no explanation was given for delivering the two star rating Refrigerator. On use, it was found that the lower portion of the Refrigerator is not cooling and causing problem to the stuff stored therein. Complaint was made on 24/06/2012 at the toll free number of the Respondent. Two persons visited the house to correct the defect but nothing was done. The written complaint was lodged but not acknowledged by the Respondent. The cost of this model is Rs.18,550/-.  The Respondent have charged excess amount. No reason of overbilling given. The two star rating consume more energy and the total difference in use of electricity cost to Rs.5,560/-. On the basis of above allegation, the Complainant asked for the refund of the amount Rs.15,000/- towards electricity charges and Rs.2 lakhs as compensation.

            The Respondent were served. No written statement filed and case proceeded ex_parte.

            The complainant filed his evidence which includes Annexure A-1, the invoice bill showing Sharp Refrigerator Model No.SJ-K-35S for a sum of Rs. 19,300/-. The sticker showing three star rating on this model, the Compressor status of the Fridge. The E.mail on 23/06/2012 complaint regarding the supply of two star in place of three star and over charging. The consumption of more electricity by this model and the electricity bill of excess amount has been filed. All these facts have been verified on oath by the Complainant, which is uncontroverted on record. This fact have not been denied by the Respondent that the complainant has not paid for a three star rating Refrigerator. He has further alleged that the cost of the three star rating is Rs.18,550/- when he has been charged Rs.19,300/- much more than the MRP of the Refrigerator in question. This is definitely unfair trade practice. The complainant has paid for a three star rating then the same should have been supplied to the complainant, more over charging excess amount then the MRP is also falls within the ambit of unfair trade practice. The complainant was raising this issue before the Respondent but none of them cared to answer his complaint. There is only one E.mail which shows that the Respondent No.1 agrees for supplying the five star rating Refrigerator subject to the complainant paying the difference of the price of the two product. This is not a issue before us, we are only concerned with the purchase made by the complainant and the product supplied to him. As per the evidence on record the Respondent have supplied him two star rating product when he has paid for three star rating product. Admittedly a two star rating product consumes more electricity than the three star rating products. This has cause financial burden upon the complainant.

            Taking all the facts and circumstances into consideration, we allow this complaint. The Respondent is directed to supply to the complainant a three star rating Refrigerator in place of the two star rating Refrigerator. The complainant will return the two star rating refrigerator on getting the three star rating Refrigerator and if the Respondent is unable to supply three star rating Refrigerator they shall return back the amount of Rs.19,300/- to the complainant and the complainant shall return the old Refrigerator to the Respondents. It is clear from the record that the complainant has to pay the excess electricity bill. He cannot get the benefit of the lower portion safe keeping of goods resulting in financial and mental stress and strain. We award the compensation of Rs.10,000/- which shall also include the cost of litigation. This amount be paid within 45 days from the date of this order failing which the complainant shall be entitled for 9% interest till this amount is paid.

The copy of the order be sent to the parties as per rules.

                                                            

POONAM MALHOTRA                                                                                            N.A.ZAIDI

          MEMBER                                                                                                         PRESIDENT