Before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Rohtak.
Complaint No. : 227
Instituted on : 12.04.2022
Decided on : 25.01.2024.
Sukhbir Singh age 63 years son of Sh. Gopal Singh resident of GarhiMajraGarhiBohar, District Rohtak.
………..Complainant.
Vs.
- Raja & Co. Shop No.45-B, Palika Bazar, Rohtak through its Proprietor.
- National Head Office, Hindware, situated at Khasra No.808 Tikri Kalan Extension, Delhi Rohtak New Delhi-110041 through Manager/Director.
…….Respondents/Opposite parties.
COMPLAINT U/S 35 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT
BEFORE: SH.NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT.
DR. TRIPTI PANNU, MEMBER.
DR.VIJENDER SINGH, MEMBER
Present: Sh.Ashwani Kumar, Advocate for the complainant.
Sh.VishalDuhan Advocate for the opposite party No.1.
Opposite party No.2 exparte.
ORDER
VIJENDER SINGH, MEMBER:
1. Brief facts of the case as per complainant are that he had purchased a Hindwarewater Heater, Model no.15 Lt./ ACERO with 24 month warranty on the product + 36 months warranty on inner tank from the respondent no.1 for a sum of Rs.4238/-. Respondent no.1 issued bill invoice no.5027 on dated 29.12.2020. Opposite party No.1 also issued guarantee/warranty card with the bill. After purchase of the same, it was found defected. The water heater noise was creating very high volume and was not producing hot water as desired and its rod was also defected. The same was brought in the knowledge ofrespondent no.1 and he advised the complainant that the complainant should call the toll free number of the company or contact with authorized customer care of the company. The complainant called the toll free number of the company and get registered his complaint and the water heater was replaced by the company. But the company has replaced the water heater with a defective piece and the same also started creating noise and very high volume and producing current while using. It was also leaking a yellow colour chemical and its rod also defected only few days after its replacement. The complainant again contacted the opposite parties and requested to repair the same. Officials of the opposite party no.1 assured the complainant to replace or repair the heater and pick/get it within 2-3 days but despite repeated requests and visits of the complainant to the opposite parties, neither the heater has been repaired nor replaced by the opposite parties within warranty period. The act of opposite parties is illegal and amounts to deficiency in service. Hence this complaint and it is prayed that opposite parties may kindly be directed to refund the cost of water heater, to pay a sum of Rs.50000/- on account of compensation for mental agony & harassment and Rs.22000/- as litigation expenses to the complainant.
2. After registration of complaint, notices were issued to the respondent/opposite parties. Opposite party no.1 in its reply has submitted that the heater was purchased by the complainant after checking the same and if there is any defect in the same, then it is the duty of respondentno.2 to sort out the same because the product is replaced by the company/respondent no.2, if the item fallen with the guarantee/warrantee period. There is no deficiency in service on the part of opposite party and dismissal of complaint has been sought. Notice sent to opposite party No. 2 through registered post and as per the track report submitted on the file, item delivery was confirmed. But none appeared on behalf of opposite party No.2 and as such opposite party No.2 was proceeded against exparte vide order dated 16.08.2022 of this Commission.
3. Ld. counsel for the complainant in his evidence has tendered affidavit Ex.CW1/A, documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C4and closed his evidence on dated 17.03.2023. Opposite party No.1 failed to conclude its evidence despite availing sufficient opportunities and evidence of opposite party No.1 was closed by the order dated 03.11.2023 of this Commission.
4. We have heard learned counsel for the complainant and have gone through material aspects of the case very carefully.
5. We have perused the documents placed on record by both the parties. In the present case complainant had purchased the water heater on 29.12.2020 which is proved from the bill Ex.C4. As per the complaint and affidavit filed by the complainant it is submitted that just after the purchase of water heater, defect was found in the alleged water heater The water heater was creating very high volume and was not producing hot water as desired and its rod was also defective. Complainant approached the opposite party company on toll free number of the company. The same was replaced but the replaced water heater was also found defective. Complainant again made a complaint on the toll free number of the company but the attendant of the company asked for repair charges whereas the same was in guarantee period . To prove the same complainant has also placed on record copy of legal notice Ex.C2. On the other hand, contention of opposite party No.1 is that if there is any defect in the alleged water heater, it is the duty of respondent no.2 to replace the product. However, opposite party No.2 did not appear despite service and was proceeded against exparte vide order dated 16.08.2022 of this Commission, which shows that they have nothing to say in the matter and all the allegations levelled by the complainant regarding defect in the water heater and not removing the defects by the company within warranty period, stands proved. Hence there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite party No.2 and opposite party No.2 being the manufacturer is liable to refund the price of water heater after deducting the 20% depreciation on it i.e. to pay Rs.3390/-(Rs.4238 less 20%).
6. In view of the fact and circumstances of the case we hereby allow the complaint and direct the opposite party No.2 to pay the amount of Rs.3390/-(Rupees three thousand three hundred and ninety only) alongwith interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of filing the present complaint i.e. 12.04.2022 till its realisation and shall also pay Rs.5000/-(Rupees five thousand only) as compensation on account of deficiency in service as well as litigation expenses to the complainant. Order shall be complied within one month from the date of decision. However, complainant is directed to hand over the Water heater in question to the opposite party No.2 at the time of receiving payment from the opposite party No.2.
7. Copy of this order be supplied to both the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.
Announced in open court:
25.01.2024.
.....................................................
Nagender Singh Kadian, President
..........................................
TriptiPannu, Member.
..........................................
Vijender Singh, Member.
