By: Miss. R.K.Madanavally, Member
Facts in brief:-
The complainant had purchased a videocon fully Automatice washing Machine from Next Retail shop, Manjeri. After six months it became defective and the matter was informed to opposite party No.2. They came to the house of the complainant and repaired it twice. At the second time, opposite party No2 had collected Rs.400/- from the complainant for the change of a small parts. This second complaint has happened after one year of the purchase and the period of warranty was also over by that time.
In the month of march it was again became defctive and the opposite party No1 demanded Rs.2135/- for the repairing and Rs.400/- as service charge. The complainant had paid the above amount to opposite party No1 and they had replaced the 'board' of the washing machine. Thereafter the machine showed the defects repeatedly and when it was informed, opposite party No1 informed that the 'replaced board' was damaged one and it has to be replaced again. When the board was replaced, opposite party No1 told to the complainant that the same was having warranty. But when the damage to the board was informed, they kept mum.
When the complainant had enquired about the defects, it was understood that the machine was having serveral manufacturing defects. The company ought to have serviced it properly. It is the duty of the opposite parties to repair it properly and make it as a defect free washing machine. Hence this complaint.
The opposite party No1 appeared and filed its version. As per the version submitted by the opposite party No.1, opposite party No3 was impleaded. Opposite party No3, set exparte. The notice to opposite party No2 was returned as 'left' . No steps were taken against opposite party No.2.
According to opposite party No1, the complainant had approached his shop and purchased a WM-PCB which belongs to the vedeocon company after proper checking. He had never repaired the washing machine of the complainant at his home. He is admitting the purchase of PCB, but he didn't know the other aspects and reason for the complaint. He cannot say whether the complaint was happened due to the lack of experience of the person who made the Service, or because of over voltage/lightining etc.
The main allegation of the complainant is against the Videocon company and the purchase was made because he believed the advertisements of the company. The duty of the opposite party No1 is to attend the registered complaint by the dealers. Opposite party No1 has no connection with the manufacture and sale of the Videocon company. The warranty, service charge and spare charge etc are fixed by the company themselves and not by the opposite partyNo1.
The main issues arises for our consideration here in are;
Whether the opposite parties are deficient in service?
If so relief and cost?
Point No.1 and 2
The complainant had adduced Ext. A1 and Ext.A2 which are the bill issued from opposite party No1 and warranty card respectively. In the Ext. A2, warranty card, the date of purchase is noted as 8.3.08. So it is clear that the warranty period is over, if it is provided for two years. Then coming to the submission of opposite party No1, his case is that he had not collected any service charge from the complainant. If he had received the above amount of Rs.400/- it should have mentioned in the Ext. A1 bill.
The opposite party No1 admitted that the PCB board was having no warranty. Oppsoite party No1 didn't repair the washing machine. They only supplied the P.C.B board. The warranty, service charge and spare charge, every thing is fixed by the vedeocon company. Opposite party No1 has no role in the above matters. He didn't know whether the complaint was happened due to the lack of experience of the person who made the service or because of over voltage/lightining etc.
As per Ext. A2, opposite party No2 is the authorised service center of Videocon Company. The complainant alleges that it is a manufacuturing defect. So the company ought to have made proper service through its authorised Service Centres.
On perusal of the warranty manual ie Ext.A2 it is seen that the period of warranty is 24 months. There is no evidence before us to prove that the complainant had availed extended warranty. So the warranty period was over. More over even if any manufacturing defect, the opposite party No1 is not
responsible for it. From the complaint and chief affidavit, it is revealed that still the washing machine is not functioning properly. Complainant has not adduced the necessary Evidence before this Forum to prove that with in six month of the purchase, it started malfunctioning. Whether it is having any manufacturing defect is also remain, not proved. But, we feel that the interest of a Consumer to purchase the Washing Machine is not confined to the functioning not only during the warranty period, but also it is intended for a along period since, in our day today life it has became a necessity and inevitable.
So, for the interest of justice we order that the opposite party No2 and 3 shall meet the repair charge, that is already paid to the opposite party No1 by the complainant, ie Rs.2135/- within 30 days of the receipt of the copy of this order.
Dated this 6th day of January, 2015
Sd/-
K.MOHAMMED ALI , PRESIDENT
Sd/-
R.K.MADANAVALLY , MEMBER
Sd/-
MINI MATHEW, MEMBER
APPENDIX
Witness examined on the side of the complainant : Nil
Documents marked on the side of the complainant : Ext.A1to A2
Ext.A1 : Cash receipt issued by 1st opposite party
Ext.A2 : Videocon washing Machine warranty Manual
Witness examined on the side of the opposite party : Nil
Documents marked on the side of the opposite party : Nil
Sd/-
K.MOHAMMED ALI , PRESIDENT
Sd/-
R.K.MADANAVALLY , MEMBER
Sd/-
MINI MATHEW, MEMBER
