DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II
Udyog Sadan, C-22 & 23, Qutub Institutional Area
(Behind Qutub Hotel), New Delhi-110016.
Case No.489/09
Ms. Afrin Khatoon
W/o Sh. Nishat Perwez,
R/o H. No.158, Block- B, First Floor,
Thokar No.8, Shaheen Bagh,
Jamia Nagar, Okhla,
New Delhi-110025 …. Complainant
Versus
1. Panasonic Customer Care Centre
(Franchise: Aditya Global Services)
K-4, Basement, Lajpat Nagar-II,
New Delhi-110024
2. Matsushita Television and Audio India Ltd.
C-52, Phase-II,
Noida-201305 (U.P.) …. Opposite parties
Date of Institution : 16.06.09 Date of Order : 01.12.16
Coram:
Sh. N.K. Goel, President
Ms. Naina Bakshi, Member
Briefly stated, the case of the Complainant is that she had purchased a colour Panasonic television of 21” alongwith a remote control model No.TC-21DSI , serial no. RK9246105681 from Swagat Enterprises, Fraser Road, Patna for a sum of Rs.19,000/- in cash vide receipt No.002 dated 05.04.2002. On 25.06.07, the T.V. become dead. She made a complaint to the OP No.1 vide complaint No.AHS 7832 on 26.06.07. Thereafter, she got the remote control and T.V. repaired from OPs on payment as detailed in the complaint. When the T.V. and the remote control allegedly became dead/dis- functional on or about 05.09.2007, she has filed the present complaint pleading negligence, defective service and unfair trade practice on the part of OPs with the following prayers:-
- Direct the OPs to replace the said T.V. alognwith the remote control for the defective and deficient service.
- Direct the OPs to refund the actual price of Rs.19,000/-.
- Direct the OPs to pay conveyance charges to the tune of Rs.29,000/-.
- Direct the OPs to pay Rs.15,000/- to the Complainant as litigation charges.
- Direct the OPs to pay for physical pain and agony as well as hardship, harassment etc. to the tune of Rs.45,000/- to the Complainant.
- Direct the OPs to pay to the Complainant miscellaneous expenses of Rs.5525/-
- Direct the OPs to pay the cost of complaint.
OP No.1 has been proceeded exparte vide order dated 21.03.13 passed by our predecessors.
In the written statement OP No.2 has inter-alia stated that the T.V. and remote control had admittedly been worked properly for a period of 7 years and even till date. The carrying out of repair in the T.V. and remote control in question on payment has been admitted. However, any deficiency in service on the part of OP No.1 is denied. It is prayed that the complaint be dismissed.
Complainant has filed a rejoinder and has stated that if manufacturing and/or inherent defect is found after the expiry of warranty period, it does not absolve the manufacturer from the consequences.
Complainant has filed her own affidavit in evidence while affidavit of Sh. Mahendra Singh Baura, AR has been filed in evidence on behalf of the OP.
Written arguments have been filed on behalf of the Complainant and OP No.2.
We have heard the arguments on behalf of the Complainant and OP No.2 and have also gone through the file very carefully.
We like to mention here that we heard the arguments in this case on 23.11.16. However, on 29.11.16 clarification/supplementary written submissions have been filed on behalf of the Complainant.
It is not in dispute that the Complainant had purchased a colour Panasonic television of 21” alongwith a remote control model No.TC-21DSI, serial no. RK9246105681 from Swagat Enterprises, Fraser Road, Patna for a sum of Rs.19,000/- in cash vide receipt No.002 dated 05.04.2002. The Complainant has filed many job sheets in respect of the T.V. repair.
From clarification/supplementary written submissions wherein it is submitted that the said T.V. has been functioning with the use of set-top box and its remote control with some problem and disturbing sound, it becomes absolutely clear that even as on date the T.V. in question has been working. The liability of the manufacturer of an electronic good cannot be extended or fastened upon it after the expiry of period of warranty. In other words, it can be said that no lifetime warranty can be given by any manufacturer of an electronic good to the purchaser of said electronic good in the absence of any contrary prescribed in the warranty /guarantee card.
In view of the above discussion, we do not find any merit in the complaint and dismiss it with no order as to costs.
Let a copy of this order be sent to the parties as per regulation 21 of the Consumer Protection Regulations. Thereafter file be consigned to record room.
Announced on 01.12.2016.
