SMT.MOLYKUTTY MATHEW : MEMBER

        This is a complaint filed by the complainant U/S 35 of the Consumer Protection Act 2019  for an order directing  the OP’s to replace the T.V and  refrigerator  or to pay the compensation of  Rs.1,00,000/-  to the complainant for the deficiency of service on their part.

The brief  of the complaint:-                                                                                                                     

     The complainant had exchanged his old TV and fridge to 1^st OP  and he purchased a new TV Hisense  LED 43 inch dtd.27/2/2021  for an amount of Rs.29690/- to 1^st OP.  He also purchased Whirlpool refrigerator on 27/2/2021 for an amount of Rs.15,590/- to 1^st OP.  Both articles he paid  extended warranty also.  Then the  TV became defective within 2 weeks   after the purchase.  The board  system of the TV is not working, the on position and sound system  is not in proper condition.  Then the complainant informed the matter to 1^st OP .  Then the service  centre of  Hisense company, ie 2^nd OP noted the defect of the TV and requested the complainant to repair the main board issue.  But the complainant is not  amenable for repairing the TV instead of replacing  a new one.  As per the terms and condition in the warranty period the OP’s are liable to repair the TV with  free  of  cost.  But in this case  the complainant is not ready to  repair the TV by 2^nd OP.  Then the complainant demanded that to replace a new one.  The other item  the Fridge also purchased by the complainant  on 27/2/2021 for an amount of Rs.15,590/- and  paid extended 2 year warranty also.  The fridge also defective within 2 weeks after the purchase.  Then the complainant informed the matter to 1^st OP that excess ice formation in the freezer and the food article kept in the refrigerator is also perished.  Thereafter the technician came to complainant’s house and inspected the refrigerator and to defrost it.  Moreover the technician states that cleaning and defrosting  the refrigerator with due care.  But the  maintenance  and cleaning is  not properly  done by the complainant.  So the act of OP’s the complainant caused much mental agony  and he demanded  new TV and new refrigerator.  So there is deficiency of service and unfair trade practice on the part of OP’s.   Hence the complaint.

       After  filing this  complaint  notice issued to 1^st OP .  1^st OP entered before the commission and  filed his written version.  1^st OP contended that he is only the dealer of the  product.  The replacement and   refund  of the product is the responsibility of the manufacturer.  The 1^st OP has not caused any financial loss or mental agony to the complainant.  So 1^st OP is  merely the dealer and he cannot be held liable for the same and the liability of  1^st  OP may be dismissed.  Moreover he  filed a petition to implead the manufacturer and service centre of the products. The commission issued notice to supplemental additional  OP.No.2 to 5. Then the supplemental 2^nd OP appeared before the commission  and filed his version submitting that 2^nd OP is unnecessary party  in this case.  Moreover he states that the technician  of this OP went to complainant’s house to check the TV and  registered the  complaint  as  directed by 1^st OP.  The technician  has detected the defect of the LED TV.  The spare parts(PCB) is with this technician  also.  So the complainant is not amenable for repair the spare parts of the TV.  The complainant is not impleaded the manufacturer of LED TV also(Hisense India).  There is no cause of action against 2^nd OP and the liability of 2^nd OP may be exonerated.  OP.NO. 3 to 5 are not appeared before the  commission and not filed version.  Hence  OP.No. 3 to 5 are called absent and set exparte.

      On the basis  of the rival contentions by the pleadings the  following  issues  were framed for consideration.

1. Whether there is  any deficiency of service   on the part of the opposite parties?
2. Whether the complainant is entitled for any relief?
3. Relief and cost.

     The evidence consists of the oral testimony of PW1 and  Exts. A1 to A3 (series) were marked . On OP’s side DWs1 &2 were examined and Exts.B1 to B4   marked.

Issue No.1 to 3 taken together: 

                The  Complainant  filed chief affidavit in lieu of  his chief examination to the tune of the pleadings in the complaint and denying the  contentions in the version.  He was cross examined as PW1 by OPs 1&2.   He relied up on Exts.A1 to A3(series). In Ext.A1 clearly shows that the complainant  paid Rs.15,590/- to 1^st OP on 27/2/2021 and  purchased a whirlpool fridge.  In Ext.A2 also dated 27/2/2021 he paid Rs.29,690/- to 1^st OP to purchase a  Hisence LED TV.  Both articles he paid additional  amount for 2 years warranty also.  Then the TV and refrigerator became defective within 2 weeks after the purchase.  Immediately the complainant informed the matter to 1^st OP.  Then the technician of 2^nd OP went to complainant’s house and inspect the TV.  2^nd OP’s technician noted  that the defect of the TV and  this  OP has brought the spare parts to repair the TV also.  But the complainant is not amenable to repair the TV instead of replacing a new  one.  The 2^nd OP stated that the brand name of the TV is Hisense India and the manufacturer is not arrayed as a party in this case.  So the 2^nd OP is only liable to repair the TV with free  of cost in a warranty period.  So the bounden duty of OP’s to repair the TV with free  of cost in the warranty period.  This OP is also ready to repair the TV (spare part  PCB) with free of cost.  On OP’s side Exts.B1 to B4 produced to prove their defense.  In Ext.B1, B3 and B4 are the  e-mail communications which  clearly shows that the complainant  is not  agree for repair.  In Ext.B2 is the Job card and the  complaint  registered as “No power on” under warranty.  The complainant has not take  steps to expert report or to prove manufacturing defect.  The OP’s are ready to  cure the defects of TV with free of cost.  So there is no deficiency  of service on the part of OP’s

       As per the complaint of refrigerator the complainant stated that excess ice formation  in the freezer and the food items kept in the fridge is  also  perished.  As per Ext.A3(series) which clearly shows the maintenance  and care, cautions while using the refrigerator.  The system for defrosting  is very important  to avoid excess ice formation in the freezer.  Thermostat controlled/press this button for defrosting once in 3 days to avoid excess formation in the freezer.  This button comes out automatically after  defrosting .  To ensure optimum performance of the  refrigerator and long lasting durability is recommended  that the refrigerator is cleaned with a soft cloth after every  20-25 days.  In this case also the complainant has taken care to handle the refrigerator properly.  So there is no manufacturing defect is proved by the complainant.  Therefore the commission  hold that the OP’s 1&2  are jointly and severally  liable to repair the TV in a  working condition with free of cost.  No order as to  compensation and cost.

          In the result the complaint is allowed in part  directing the  opposite parties 1&2 are jointly and severally liable to repair  the TV of the complainant  in a working condition  with free of cost  within  30 days of  receipt  of this order. In default the 1^st opposite party is directed to refund the value of  TV for Rs.29,690/- to the complainant.    Failing which the  complainant is at liberty to  execute  the  order as  per the  provisions  of Consumer Protection Act 2019.

Exts:

A1&A2- Tax Invoice dtd.26/2/2021

A2-Delivery receipt dtd.16/11/21

A3(series)- warranty card

B1,B3,B4- E-mail communications

B2- Job card.

PW1-Ajithkumar.P- Complainant

DW1-Prajith.K-1^st OP

DW2-Arunchandran-2^nd OP

Sd/                                                             Sd/                                                   Sd/

PRESIDENT                                             MEMBER                                               MEMBER

Ravi Susha                                       Molykutty Mathew                                    Sajeesh K.P

eva           

                                                                        /Forwarded by Order/

                                                                   ASSISTANT REGISTRAR