<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> By R.VIJAYAKUMAR, MEMBER.<br /> <br /> The Complaint is filed for getting direction for replacement of washing machine and Compensation and Cost.<br /> <br /> The averments in the Complaint can be briefly summarized as follows :<br /> <br /> The Complainant purchased Electron KEL Digi Washing Machine from the 1st opposite party on 29.11.02 for Rs. 12,800/-. During 2003, which was with in the warranty period the Machine became defunct and it was informed to the III opposite party and the defect was rectified. During the year 2005 also the machine was repaired by the III opposite <br /> party and the service charge Rs. 700/- was paid by the complainant. On 07.06.06 the said Washing Machine was remained defunct once more. It was informed to the IIIrd opposite party. The repairer of III opposite party inspected and told to replace PCB and he took away the PCB. Complainant contacted continuously to the III opposite party. But the PCB was not replaced by the opposite party with a suitable one. The II opposite party telephoned and asked to sent a DD for Rs. 7,700/- to replace the machine. The opposite parties committed dereliction of duties and cheated the complainant. The complainant suffered physical and mental agony. Hence the complaint.<br /> <br /> The 1st opposite party remained absent. Hence set exparte. Opposite party 2 and 3 filed version contenting the interalia that the complaint is not maintainable either in law or on facts. I and II opposite party have some business relations and on the basis of that relation they were managing and conducting after- sale service within warranty period. They have no knowledge of any repair during the year 2003 and with in the warranty period. During the year 2005 October Washing Machine was repaired and service charge was received by the III opposite party. During 2006 complainant contacted to the opposite parties and expressed his willingness to exchange the Washing machine. So the II opposite party asked him to sent a DD for Rs 7,700/-. There is no loss or physical, mental or financial sufferings and social agony and prize for disposal of the complaint.<br /> <br /> Complainant filed affidavit and he was examined as Pw1. Exhibits P1 to P3 marked. Opposite parties 2 and 3 prayed for evidence, but remained absent and hence set exparte. <br /> <br /> The points arised for consideration are:<br /> <br /> 1)Whether there is any deficiency intervene on the part of opposite party.<br /> 2)Compensation and cost.<br /> <br /> <br /> The Washing machine was purchased on 29/11/02. Warranty period extents only up to 29/11/04. Complainant submitted no material to prove that the PCO was replaced due to the non - functioning of the Washing Machine during the warranty period. Even though it was happened, the defect was rectified by the opposite party. Complainant has not produced any material evidence to show that the machine became defective and the opposite parties were reluctant for services to the same. As the warranty period is over complainant cannot claim for replacement of Washing Machine. We found there is no deficiency in service on the part of opposite party. The complaint is liable to be dismissed.<br /> <br /> <br /> In the result the complaint fails, and is dismissed. Not order as to costs. <br /> <br /> <br /> Dated this the 19th day of JUNE, 2008<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />