Jammu and Kashmir

Jammu

CC/292/2018

SANJAY KUMAR - Complainant(s)

Versus

RAVI KUMAR - Opp.Party(s)

MUKESH KUMAR

30 Nov 2018

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,JAMMU

(Constituted under J&K Consumer Protection Act,1987)

                                                          .

 Case File  No.:                143/DFJ           

 Date of  Institution   :    04-08-2018

 Date of Decision      :      30-11-2018

 

Sanjay Gandhi,

S/O Sh.Raminder Lal,

R/O H.No.701 Purkhoo Kote,

Jammu.

                                                                                                                                    -Complainant

                      V/S

1.Ravi Kumar

  Prop.M/S Pioneer Electronics,

  Talab Tillo,Jammu.

2.Corporate Office,

   Hitachi Air Conditioned Ltd.

  Hitachi Complex,Karan Nagar

 Kadi Distt.Mehsana,Gujarat India.

3.M/S Saini Enterprises Service Centre,

  107/1 Sanjay Nagar Jammu,

 Authorized Service Centre of Hitachi.

                                                                                                                                                      Opposite parties

CORAM:-

                  Sunit Gupta                     (Distt.& Sessions Judge) - President

                  Ms.Vijay Angral                                                              -  Member

                  Mr.Ghulam Sarwar Chouhan                                       - Member

 

In the matter of: Complaint under section 10 of J&K Consumer Protection Act 1987.

                             

Mr.Mukesh Kumar,Advocate for complainant, present.

OPs 1to 3 set exparte.

 

                                                                   ORDER

                    The complainant has approached this Forum with the allegations that he had purchased a Hitachi Split A.C. 318 EAD with capacity of 1.5 ton from OP1, namely,Ravi Kumar vide invoice No.508 and made the payment of Rs.32,501/-The said Split A.C.was required to be installed by the complainant at his shop M/S Sanjay Communication at Main Chowk,Talab Tillo,Jammu and the same was installed by OP1 on the said complex through employees of Hitachi Company. It has also submitted that the OP1 did not issue any proper guarantee/warranty card for the said product. Since installation, the aforesaid AC did not work properly, as such, the complainant had lodged complaint about its mal-functioning with OP1,but instead of redressing the grievance of complainant, the OP1 had forced him out from his shop after using unparliamentary language.Thereafter,complainant had issued a legal notice dated 20-06-2018 to OP1 and had also lodged complaint with OP3 being authorized service centre in Jammu. The representative of OP3 had visited the shop of complainant and inspected the machine and openly declared that machine sold by OP1 was defective. After inspection of the representative of OP3 on 26-06-2018 the complainant observed that the water had started oozing out from the air wends of the AC which fell on the mobile phones kept in the shop of complainant for repairing purposes and as such complainant is claiming huge loss of about Rs.1.75 lacs for those mobile phones. The complainant had again issued legal notice dated 02-07-2018 upon OPs,but neither of them have either replaced the AC nor have compensated him for the cost of AC,installation charges and loss suffered to him on account of oozing of water from the said AC.It is submitted by the complainant that the OPs have provided deficient services to him and have also cheated him by selling a defective AC and made the complainant to face scorching heat and human conditions despite having paid the full price of the A.C.Hence the complainant by way of this complaint is claiming compensation on account of inconvenience, mental torture and agony to the tune of Rs.50,000/-on account of price of AC amounting to Rs.32,501/-on account of damage to mobiles and accessories amounting to Rs.1,75,000/-on account of business loss due to less foot fall of customers at his shop amounting to Rs.50,000/-litigation expenses amounting to Rs.10,000/-and in total he is claiming compensation amounting to Rs.3,17,501/-

               On the filing of the present complaint,OPs were put on notice to call their written version on the allegations put forth by the complainant in this complaint. But despite due receipts of notice,OPs did not respond nor they preferred to appear before this Forum, as such, the right of OPs to file objections stood closed vide order dated 03-10-2018 and complainant was directed to lead evidence.

                    Complainant besides his own evidence affidavit has also produced evidence affidavit of one witness,namely,Raman Kumar.Complainant has placed on record copy of tax invoice, copy of guarantee/warranty card and photographs of AC.

             The statement of complainant and his witness are reproduced in brief as under:

              Complainant Sanjay Gandhi has deposed in his evidence affidavit that he had purchased one Hitachi Split AC with the capacity of 1.5 ton from OP1 vide invoice No.508 and made payment of Rs.32,501/-.It is deposed that the said AC was installed at his shop M/S Sanjay Communication at Main Chowk Talab Tillo,Jammu by the employees of Hitachi Company, but no proper guarantee/warranty card was issued to him. Since the AC was not working properly, as such he had immediately lodged complaint before OP1 for its mal-functioning, but instead of redressing his grievance, OP1 had forced him out from his shop and used unparliamentarily language. Thereafter he had issued a legal notice dated 20-06-2018 upon OP1 and simultaneously lodged complaint with OP3 being authorized service centre in Jammu. When the representative of OP3 had visited the shop of complainant and inspected the machine, he had openly declared that the machine was defective. Subsequently on,26-06-2018 complainant had observed that the water had started oozing from the AC wends, which fell on the mobile phones of the complainant which were kept in the shop for repairing purposes. Hence the complainant has claimed compensation as he has claimed in the complaint.

          Complainant’s witness,namely,Raman Kumar in his evidence affidavit has stated that he had accompanied complainant to OP1 at the time of purchase of Hitachi Split AC.According to him the AC was installed at the shop of complainant Sanjay Gandhi in his presence and the OP1 did not issue any proper guarantee/warranty card of said AC.He has also corroborated the complainant that since the installation of aforesaid AC it was working properly, as such the complainant had immediately lodged complaint about the mal-functioning of the AC with OP1,but OP1 has not treated the complainant properly and has not redressed his grievance. According to him OP3 had sent a representative from his shop to inspect the AC machine of the complainant and the said person after inspecting the machine had openly declared that the machine was defective. It is also stated by him that on,26-06-2018 water had started oozing from the air wends of AC which fell on the mobile phones lying in the shop of complainant for repairing purposes and thus a huge loss amounting to Rs.1,75,000/-was suffered by him. He has submitted that the Ops have provided deficient services to the complainant and as such they are liable to compensate the complainant on different counts claimed by him.

                   We have heard L/C for the complainant and also considered the mitigating circumstances arise in the present complaint.

                      At the very outset we are compelled to say that since the Ops have not preferred to appear and contest this complaint, as such there is no rebuttal to the allegations made by the complainant in the present complaint and there is no rebuttal to the evidence put forth by the complainant. Hence we have no hesitation in accepting the evidence lead by the complainant.

              As per the allegations of complainant which is also supported by his own evidence affidavit and the evidence affidavit of witness,namely,Raman Kumar,onething is clear that the complainant has been supplied with a defective Split AC of Hitachi Company and even after detecting defects proper service has not been given to him by OPs particularly OP1.

              From the annexures appended with the complaint it is evident that Hitachi Split AC 1.5 ton capacity was purchased by the complainant from OP1 vide its invoice for the cost of Rs.32,501/-It is also evident from annexure-B that OP1 has not filled up the warranty card which was lying a part of the Owner’s Manual of said Hitachi Split Air Conditioner. The said Warranty Booklet is found to be blank which is required to be filed up by OP1 as the retailer of the said product. This inaction on the part of OP1 amounts to deficiency in service on his part. Complainant has also annexed photographs of the machine in question i.e. Split AC which is shown to be in installed condition. From the perusal of those photographs it reflects that the water is oozing out from the AC wends of the Split AC and the said water was appeared to have fallen on the mobile phones lying in the shop of complainant for repairing purposes.

                      At the cost of repetition, we have to say that since the OPs have not preferred to appear and contest this complaint and rebutted the evidence brought by the complainant before us, as such we are inclined to accept the evidence of complainant, as well as, claim put forth by him.

                 This is a case of deficiency in service. The Ops despite service of notice, sent by the Forum through registered cover have not taken any action to represent the case before this Forum, either to admit the claim of complainant, or to deny it, so there is no reply filed by the Ops in this complaint and there is also no evidence in rebuttal. The present case of the complainant is covered by Section 11 2(b) (ii) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1987, which provides that in a case, where the OPs omits or fails to take any action to represent their case within the time given by Forum, in that situation, the Forum shall settle the consumer dispute on the basis of evidence brought to its notice by the complainant. Sub-clause 2 (b) of the Section 11, clearly provides that even where the OPs omits or fails to taken any action to represent their case before the Forum, the dispute has still to be decided on the basis of evidence brought to its notice by the complainant.

                   So far as role of oP3 is concerned, we have smell out from the language of complaint, as well as, evidence lead by the complainant that OP3 has not shown any inefficiency to provide service to complainant as he had sent his representative to the complainant’s shop for the inspection of the unit. Even complainant in his complaint, as well as, in his statement has not alleged any adverse statement against him,therefore,according to this Forum OP3 is not liable to pay any kind of compensation to the complainant.

                       Hence, complaint is admitted and OP1&2 are directed to either replace the Hitachi Split AC 318 EAD with 1.5 ton capacity or in the alternative to repay the cost of AC amounting to Rs.32, 501/-to complainant. In addition to it, complainant is also entitled to get compensation for damage to mobile phones and accessories which were lying in his shop and damaged due to water oozing out from the AC wends. Complainant is also entitled to recover litigation expenses from OP1&2 amounting to Rs.5000/-.Complainant is also found to be entitled for the compensation on account of inconvenience, mental torture and agony faced by him due to deficiency of service on the part of OP1&2 and on this account, complainant is entitled to an amount of Rs.10,000/-. The awarded amount be deposited by OP1&2 in this Forum within one month from the date of receipt of this order. Copy of this order be provided to the parties free of costs. The complaint is accordingly disposed of and file be consigned to records after its due compilation.

Announced                                                       (Sunit Gupta)                                        

 30-11-2018                                                (Distt.& Sessions Judge)

 Agreed by                                                        President                                                      

                                                                       (District Consumer Forum)

Ms.Vijay Angral                                                 Jammu.

Member

 

Mr.Ghulam Sarwar Chauhan

Member