BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION AT BANGALORE (URBAN)

DATED 05^TH DAY OF OCTOBER2024

ORDER

SMT. SUMA ANILKUMAR, MEMBER

1. The complainant filed U/s 35 of the Consumer Protection Act 2019, complainant seeking direction towards OP’s for the following reliefs.

1. Cost of the coffee maker.                          -   Rs.1,097/-
2. Repair cost of the OnidaMicrowave          -   Rs.2,700/-

Suchitra Electronics Jayanagar

Dated: 5/11/2023

3. Repair cost of Electric Chimney,              -   Rs.1,700/-

Suchitra Electronics, Jayanagar

Dated: 7/11/2023.

4. Cost of Electrician visit charges, twice.    -   Rs.1,000/-
5. Other Expenses.                                      -   Rs.5,000/-
6. Litigation charges.                                   -   Rs.2,500/-
   1. Total                                             –   Rs.13,997/-

2. Brief facts of the case which as follows:-

The complainant submits that he purchased a coffee maker on 15/09/2023 vide bill No.2324/50/R1 328 from OP2. While using the said coffee maker, it was found faulty as there was reverse flow of electricity from it, which damaged AEH connecting items like chimney, Microwave, washing machine etc., in the kitchen. When checked it was found that there was no defect in the electricity connection of the complainantshouse and the defect was in the coffee maker.Hence on 27/09/2023the complainant went to OP2 shop and informed the same and returned the product for repair. The complainant collected the product after repair on 1/10/2023 but on using the coffee maker, the same problem continued. Hence again on 04/10/2023 the complainant returned the faulty product for repair. On collecting the coffee maker from OP2 on 11/10/2023,the complainant found that he was again facing the same problem with the product. The complainant on contacting the shop was advised to contact the service center as the repair was done in the service center of the company. The complainant further submits that he discussed the same with OP2 on 18/10/2023.The complainant also called an electrician to check the electric connection of his house and kitchen for around 4 times since he bought the product and found that the electric connection and the earthing of his house perfect with no problem.

3. The complainant contacted OP2 many times and also sent an E-mail to the company but there was no response or reply. The complainant as a last chance approaches the OPs and requests for the return of a coffee maker or refund the amount paid towards it. The complainant submits that he requested the sales lady in the shop to send a technician and verify the kitchen of his,but the lady misbehaves and speaks rudely to the complainant and fails to respond.

4. The complainant being senior citizens aged 60 years submits that he can’t fight on the petty issue for no fault of his. The complainant further contacted Shri Samer Gouda and Kamal Nayak of the company and escalated the issue requesting them to give an opportunity to show all the records and the product in the factory premises. Since the complainant could not contact them again on phone. He approaches customer care person many times but all in vain.The complainant issued notice dated 15/02/2024 but there was no reply from the OPs. As there was no response from the OPs, left with no option the complainant had to file this case. Hence this complaint.

5. On issue of notice to OPs, the OPs fail to appear before this commission and hence placed ex-parte. The complainant files affidavit evidence along with 10 documents marked as Ex.P1 to Ex.P10 complainant files written arguments.

6.On the basis of above pleadings for our consideration are as follows:-

i) Whether the complainant has proved the deficiency of service on the part of OP?

ii) Whether complainant is entitled for the relief?

iii) What order?

07. Our answers to the above points are as follows:-

                      Point No.1:- Affirmative.

                      Point No.2:- Partly Affirmative.

                      Point No.3:- As per the final order.

REASONS

08. Point No.1 and 2: These points are inter-connected to each other and for the sake of convenience, to avoid repetition of facts, these points are taken up together for common discussion.

09. On perusal of the documents submitted by the complainant in the Ex.P1 which is invoice copy issued by OP2 for an amount of Rs.1,097/- dated 15/09/2023,it is true that the complainant has purchased coffee maker from OPs.Looking into Ex.P2 which is warranty card of OP2, we see that the product was given for service to the service center and taken back on 01/10/2023 Ex.P3 is an invoice copy of the repair of ONIDA Microwave dated 05/11/2023 issued by Suchitra Electronics for an amount of Rs.2,700/-. Ex.P4 is an invoice copy of the repair of Electric chimney for an amount of Rs.1,700/- dated 07/11/2023 issued by Suchitra Electronics. Ex.P5 is a copy of E-mail sent by the complainant to the OP’s. Ex.P6 is the notice sent by the complainant to the OPs.

10. Looking into the above documents submitted by the complainant. It is true that the complainant had purchased a coffee maker from OP2 and had also returned the said coffee maker for service to the OP’s within 1 month from the date of purchase. The complainant has struggled and suffered by following up for the repair of the said product as he is trying to get the product repaired time and again from the OPs,though the product warranty period was well within the time limit.The complainant not only suffered with the faulty product but also had to bear for the repairs of other electric goods he processed. Even after the said product was returned to the OPs, the complainant further waited for the solution of the same from the OPs. The complainant patiently waited for replacement or repayment of the product he had purchased. The product purchased by the complainant was a faulty from the date of purchase itself. The OPs fail to respond or repay to the consumer /complainant and has shown not only deficiency in service but also unfair trade practice.

11. The OP’s fails to appear before this commission and submit their version and evidence in their contention. “The non-appearance of OPs and non-filing of written version to the complaint before this commission amounts to admission of the allegation leveled against them in the Consumer Complaint.”

12. Under Consumer Protection Act 2019 “Product liability” means that theresponsibility of the product manufacturer or product seller, of any product or service, to compensate for any harm caused to a consumer by such defective product manufactured or sold or by deficiency in service. The product liability falls on the OPs for manufacturing and the selling faulty or defective products. Hence the liability falls on the OPs to replace or repay the said faulty product. The OPs are directed to repay the amount and Rs.1,097/- paid towards  the coffee maker. Compensation of Rs.15,000/- and litigation charges of Rs.2,000/-.

Order

1. Complaint filed by the complainant U/S 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019, is hereby dismissed. No costs.
2. OPs are jointly and severally directed to pay the amount of Rs.1,097/- with an interest of 8% from 15/09/2023 till realization.
3. The OPs are further directed to pay a compensation of Rs.15,000/- and litigation cost of Rs.2,000/-.
4. OPs are directed to pay the entire award amount within 45 days from the date of order failing which the OP’s shall pay an interest 10% per annum on the award amount till realization.
5. Furnish the copies of the order to both parties at free of cost.

(Dictated to the Stenographer, got it transcribed and corrected, pronounced in the Open Commission on this 05^thday of October 2024)

Documents produced by the Complainant-P.W.1 are as follows: