Order-9.
Date-30/09/2015.
In this complaint Complainant Pradip Kumar Sahaby filing this complaint has submitted that ops M/s. Samsung India Electronics Pvt. Ltd. (H.O.) has engaged in business of selling consumer durables goods like Air Conditioning, Refrigerator, TV, Phone etc. to the public for a consideration through their authorized retail distributors apart from other activities.Complainant purchased one Samsung AC of 1.5 Tons (Window Type) Model AW18ZKA on 25.04.2009 from Fundamental Electronics Pvt. Ltd. vide Invoice No. FEG/009-10/00512.
On 09.09.2014 during the hot hours at about 2 a.m. a fire broke out from air conditioning machine and it was spread to the two way switch meant for the operation of the AC Machine and a foul smell and smoke was coming out from the AC Machine causing suffocating condition in the room and was grippling in the entire room, family members woke up from the deep sleep at that hour started crying and shouted loudly for help.
In fact the incident of fire took place just after expiry of the warranty period and on 09.09.2014 at about 2.00 hours his son noticed a spark of fire near the main switch and meter board as well.Anyhow after throwing sand on the said spark of fire and switched off the main switch and local electrician was called in for inspection and in the morning CESC authorities were informed and they attended and local electrician tested and checked the working electric system of complainant’s house and opined that the said occurrence took place due to AC Machine’s short circuit and this accident took place deep in the night and anyhow they saved themselves.
On 09.09.2009 a complaint was lodged to the op (Customer Care) bearing No. 8428068333 and service engineer of the op attended and ascertained that due to compressor failure the ignition of fire took place and the incident of fire took place within the AC Machine immediate after warranty and as per advice of service engineer of the op on 09.09.2014 the AC Machine was sent to the authorized service center of the op on 10.09.2014 and authorized service center of op was served a repairing cost at the tune of Rs. 9,715.27 paisa on 12.09.2014.
OP simply avoided the responsibility and shifting it on the complainant’s shoulder and demanded huge cost for repairing just immediate after five months of the date of warranty but complainant did not agree for which other executives of the customer care of the OP threatened the complainant from their various incoming phone number to pay Rs. 9,715.27 paisa and thus ops harassed the complainant in such a manner.But fact remains that ops did not bother to listen about the manufacturing defects of the compressor of the AC Machine which got fire just immediate after expiry of five months of warranty and in the above circumstances complainant has prayed for directing the op to replace the defective AC Machine with one New AC Machine and for compensation.
Notices were duly served upon the ops and it was duly served.But they did not contest this case.In the above circumstances, the case is heard exparte.
Decision with reasons
On proper consideration of the entire materials on record and further hearing the consumer himself and also considering the complaint, we find that it is no doubt an admitted position that complainant purchased an AC Machine of Samsung Company manufacturing unit on 25.07.2009 and he used it up to 09.09.2014 and no doubt five years warranty period expired on 25.04.2014.But after lapse of five months from the date of warranty, it was fire caught in the said AC Machine while it was running in the hot season and complainant reported the matter to the service engineer of the op on 09.09.2014 and authorized service center of the op came and AC Machine was sent to the authorized service center of the op on 10.09.2014.It is admitted fact that authorized service center of op demanded Rs. 9,715.27 paisa on 12.09.2014 for repairing the said compressor practically for compressor failure.Now the question is whether complainant is entitled to get relief.In this regard we have gathered that warranty period have already expired and complainant has admitted that fact.But it is true that due to compressor failure ignition of fire took place and in fact just after warranty period that compressor failure caused.Then it is clear that any item which are being purchased by the customer shall be found defective and not usable after expiry of warranty period and can it be believe that an AC Machine shall be purchased by the customer only up to warranty period and after warranty period, all sorts of defect shall be found.
Anyhow Samsung Company is a world famous company and its product the compressor failed just after warranty period.At the same time it is found that the service engineer did not find any defect in running the unit and considering that fact we are of the opinion that no doubt the said machine is lying with the Cool Point Service Center and so within one month from the date of receipt of this order OPs to fix it in the house of the complainant in running condition and shall observe in trial for two months make it usable and for such repairing, transporting and other.Ops shall be at liberty to charge only Rs. 4,000/- from the complainant and complainant shall have to pay Rs. 4,000/- and ops shall have to make this AC Machine fit for use by changing the compressor and truth is that it is the legal duty on the part of the ops.
So, ops particularly Samsung India Electronics Pvt. Ltd. Kolkata Head Office and Cool Point Service Center are directed to comply the order very strictly and to make the same AC Machine fit for proper use by service center and service center shall fix the same for the use of the complainant and shall have to give a certificate that the said compressor is a new one and give such warranty in respect of the compressor for at least one year.
Ops are directed to comply the order very strictly failing which for non-compliance of the Forum’s order, op nos. 1 to 4 shall have to pay penal damages at the rate ofRs. 100/- per day till full satisfaction of the decree and if it is collected, then it shall be deposited to this Forum.
Even if it is found that ops are reluctant to comply this order, in that case ops shall be prosecuted u/s 25 read with 27 of C.P. Act, 1986 for which further penalty and fine shall be imposed upon the ops.
Hence ordered accordingly as per spirit of body of this judgment the complainant is allowed ex parte with a cost of Rs.2,000/- against all the OPs.OPs jointly, particularly OPs1, 2 and 4 shall pay the cost to the complainant also.
