Delhi

East Delhi

CC/894/2014

ABDUL - Complainant(s)

Versus

P.S DIGITAL - Opp.Party(s)

21 Jan 2019

ORDER

                  DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM, EAST, Govt of NCT Delhi

                  CONVENIENT SHOPPING CENTRE, 1^st FLOOR, SAINI ENCLAVE, DELHI 110092                                  

                                                                                                 

                                                                                                  Consumer complaint no.          894/2014

                                                                                                  Date of Institution                  09/10/2014

                                                                                                  Order Reserved on                 21/01/2019

                                                                                                  Date of Order                          23/01/2019  

                                                                                                        

In matter of

Mr. Abdul Mateen, adult 

S/o- Sh Abdul Malik

R/o- 1367, Gali Madarasa Shah Aziz

Kanal Mahal, Daryagunj, New Delhi 110002.…………..……….Complainant                                                                  

                                                                     Vs

1-P S Digital World  

73, Vijay Chauk, Vikas Nagar,  

Laxmi Nagar, Delhi 110092

 

2-The Manager, Voltas India Ltd.,  

3026/7F, Shiv Chauk, Ranjeet Nagar

South Patel Nagar, New Delhi 110008 …...………………………  Opponents

 

Complainant……………………………………In  Person

Opponent 1&2...……………………………..Nahata & Company Advocates

 

Quorum            Sh Sukhdev Singh      President

                           Dr P N Tiwari              Member                                                                                                   

                           Mrs Harpreet Kaur    Member

 

Order by Dr P N Tiwari  Member 

 

Brief Facts of the case

 

Complainant purchased window AC 1.5 model no. 185 Ey (s) through Bajaj Finance from OP1/ M/s P S Digital World for a sum of Rs 34,700/-vide invoice no. 039 on dated 26/04/2014. The Ac within a week developed problem of water leakage and low cooling. It was stated that the demo piece was supplied by OP1, so lodged complaint with OP2. Service man attended the complaint and rectified problem, but the same problem again occurred within a week of its repair, so again complaint was lodged on 08/05/2014 vide complaint no. 14050803733. It was again rectified.

Complainant stated that number of complaints were lodged on 19/07/2014, 05/08/2014, 11/08/2014 26/08/2014 and 08/09/2014, but complaints neither attended nor replied. Later asked for refund of the cost of AC Rs 34,700/- or replacement with new one. When no reply received, filed this complaint and demanded replacement of defective AC with new one or refund the cost of AC with any other relief may be granted by the Forum.  

 

Notices were served. OP1/ seller, P S Digital world submitted written statement and denied allegations of complainants as false and incorrect. It was stated that the said AC was purchased in good quality and had no manufacturing defects. OP1 being as performa party, guarantee and services were provided by the manufacturer/OP2 of the products and their product carry one year standard warranty. Whenever complaint was lodged by complainant, it was attended properly and well in time and problem was rectified by service engineer. Hence, allegation of deficiency in services or defective product sold by OP1 does not arise and prayed for dismissal of complaint.  

OP2 stated that there was no manufacturing defect. Whenever complaint was lodged timely attended and there was no evidence of manufacturing defect ever reported and complainant had not filed any evidence of job sheet on record which could prove deficiency of OPs. So this complaint may be dismissed.

Complainant filed rejoinder to written statements of OP1 and 2 and denied all the replies submitted and stated that his all facts of complaint were correct and true. Complainant submitted evidences through his own affidavit and relied on invoice as Ex CW1/1.

OP2 submitted their evidences on affidavit through Mr. Ashok Yadav, Branch Service Manger with OP2. He stated on oath that no evidence of manufacturing defect submitted on record by complainant. Also no evidence of job sheet on record, hence complaint may be dismissed. OP1/seller did not submit any evidence.   

Arguments were heard from both the parties and order was reserved.  

We have gone through all the facts and evidences on record. It was admitted by OP that the said AC was purchased and was manufactured by OP and services were provided by their authorized service centre regularly and as per satisfaction of complainant.  

So, we are of the opinion that complainant could not prove the deficiency of services provided by OP1 and as there is no evidence of manufacturing defect in AC, so liability of OP2 cannot be fasted. That being so, this complaint deserves to be dismissed so dismissed without cost.

 

The first free copy of this order be sent to the complainant as per Regulation 18 (6) of the Consumer Protection Regulations, 2005 (in short the CPR) and file be consigned to the Record Room under regulation 20 (1) of the CPR.

 

 (Dr) P N Tiwari Member                                                                       Mrs Harpreet Kaur  Member                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            

                                                

                                              Shri Sukhdev Singh President