Complainant   :         Smt. Sanjukta Sahu, 38 Years, W/o. Rajendra Ku. Sahu,

         LIC Colony, Parabeda- 7640 01, Jeypore, Dist- Koraput.                                      

                                     Vrs.

Opp. Parties     :     1. Prop. M/s. Patra Agencies, At- Sriram Nagar Jn.,

          Aska Road, Berhempur,  Dist- Ganjam.

`                           2. M/s.  Naveen Communication, New Tank Road,

        At/Po/Dist- Nabarangapur- 764 059.

     3. Samsung India Electronics Pvt. Ltd.,

A-25, Ground Floor, Front Tower, Mohan Cooperative

Industrial Estate, New Delhi-110 044.                           

                                           -x-

For Complainant          :             Self

For Ops 1 & 2                 :             None.

For OP No.3                    :             Sri Santosh Kumar Mishra, Advocate & associates.

                                                                                      -x-

1.                         The brief history of the case of the complainant is that she purchased a Samsung Refrigerator model-RR19J20A3SE from OP No.1 vide Invoice No.2769 dt.19.04.2017 for Rs.10, 990/- who delivered the refrigerator to the complainant at their stock premises, Jeypore.  It is submitted that after a couple of month of use the complainant found no cooling of refrigerator and hence she lodged complaint with the Ops through their toll free number besides personal requests to OP.1 but the Ops did not respond.  It is further submitted that after a long pursuance, the OP.2 mechanics came on 17.02.2018 and repaired the refrigerator and through invoice dt.17.02.2018 demanded Rs.2854/- from the complainant towards cost of repair though the unit was under warranty and also received the amount.  It is also submitted that after few days of its use the refrigerator lost its cooling process again and on repeated contacts to the Ops, they did not come forward to provide service in spite of assurances and hence the refrigerator is lying unused.  Thus alleging defect in goods and deficiency in service on the part of the Ops she filed this case praying the Forum to direct the Ops to refund Rs.10, 990/- towards cost of refrigerator and Rs.2854/- towards charges taken by OP.2 during warranty period with interest @ 12% p.a. from the respective dates and to pay Rs.25, 000/- towards compensation and costs to the complainant.

2.                         The Ops 1 & 2 in spite of valid notice neither filed counter nor participated in this proceeding in any manner and thus remained exparte.

3.                         The OP.3 filed counter denying the allegations of the complainant and contended that the handset purchased by the complainant is a well established product in the market over a period of years.  Denying the allegation of manufacturing defect in the unit, the OP.3 stated that no evidence has been furnished by the complainant to prove the manufacturing defect in the unit.  The OP further contended that the complainant is put to strict proof of the fact that the refrigerator has got major problem of manufacturing defect and if a consumer has genuine complaint, the Company has no problem in redressing the same.  It is further denied that the OP.2 has repaired the unit on cost paid basis and for wrongful gains and to harass the OPs the complainant has filed this case. Thus denying any fault on its part, the OP.3 prayed to dismiss the case of the complainant.

3.                         The complainant has filed certain documents in support of her case.  We heard from the complainant and the A/R for the OP.3 and perused the materials available on record.

4.                         In this case, purchase of Samsung Refrigerator Model-RR19J20A3SE from OP No.1 vide Invoice No.2769 dt.19.04.2017 for Rs.10, 990/- is an admitted fact as ascertained from the record.  The complainant stated that she found poor cooling pattern of the refrigerator after use of couple of month since purchase for which she approached the Ops through their toll free number as well as personal approaches but they did not turn up. It is further submitted that after a long pursuance, the OP.2 mechanics came on 17.02.2018 and repaired the refrigerator and through invoice dt.17.02.2018 demanded Rs.2854/- from the complainant towards cost of repair though the unit was under warranty and also received the amount. 

5.                         It is seen that the complainant has purchased the refrigerator on 19.04.2017 as ascertained from the Invoice issued by OP No.1.  The complainant found poor cooling behaviour of the refrigerator within a couple of month of its purchase.  Hence she lodged complaint with the Ops through their toll free number as well as personal approaches.  The OP No.2 only came on 17.02.2018 and has repaired the unit on cost paid basis.  It is seen from the record that the refrigerator became defective within its warranty period of one year and to repair the unit the ASC of the Company has demanded and received a sum of Rs.2854/- from the complainant.  According to the complainant, again after few days of use the refrigerator lost its cooling and hence she approached the Ops for repair but they did not turn up.

6.                         The OP.3 in its counter stated that the complainant has not furnished expert opinion in the form of evidence to prove that the set suffers from manufacturing defect.  In this regard we are of the opinion that the ASC of the Company are armed with all technical persons to provide after sale service to the customers on behalf of the Company.  The complainant has approached the Ops and the OP No.2 (ASC) repaired the unit on cost paid basis but in spite of repair, the defect in the unit returned.  On further contract, the Ops did not pay any attention to the grievance of the complainant.

9.                         In the above facts and circumstances, it can be safely held that the refrigerator of OP.3 has got some major defect within warranty period for which the unit could not be brought into action in spite of repairs by its ASC.  As such the present complainant is entitled to get refund of Rs.10, 990/- towards cost of the refrigerator besides Rs.2854/- towards cost of repair with interest @ 12% p.a. from 17.02.2018, the date of repair of the unit.  Further the complainant must have suffered some mental agony due to defective set sold to her and non repair of the set and for such inaction of the Ops the complainant has come up with this case incurring some expenditure.  Thus the complainant is entitled for compensation beside cost of this litigation.  Considering the sufferings, we feel a sum of Rs.3000/- towards compensation and Rs.500/- towards cost in favour of the complainant will meet the ends of justice.

10.                       Hence ordered that the complaint petition is allowed in part and the OP No.3 being liable is directed to refund Rs.10, 990/- towards cost of the refrigerator besides Rs.2854/- towards cost of repair with interest @ 12% p.a. from 17.02.2018 in lieu of defective refrigerator and to pay Rs.3000/- towards compensation and Rs.500/- towards cost of litigation to the complainant within 30 days from the date of communication of this order.

 (to dict.)