Tamil Nadu

North Chennai

CC/393/2018

Rayala Corporation Pvt. Ltd., - Complainant(s)

Versus

Samsung india Electronics Pvt. ltd., - Opp.Party(s)

George Cheriyan

15 Sep 2022

ORDER

Complaint presented on  :30.07.2012         

Date of disposal             :15.09.2022

                                                                                  

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

CHENNAI (NORTH)

@ 2^ND Floor, T.N.P.S.C. Road, V.O.C. Nagar, Park Town, Chennai -600003.

 

PRESENT: THIRU. G.VINOBHA, M.A., B.L.                            : PRESIDENT

                    TMT. KAVITHA KANNAN,M.E.,                          : MEMBER-I

                              THIRU V. RAMAMURTHY, B.A.B.L., PGDLA    : MEMBER II

 

C.C. No.393/2018

 

DATED THIS THURSDAY THE 15^th  DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2022

Rayala Corporation Pvt.Ltd.,

No.144/7, Old Mahabalipuram Road,

Kottivakkam

Chennai-600 041

Rep.by its Director,

Mr.M.R.Pratap.

                                                                                               .. Complainant.                                  

..Vs..

 

1.M/s.Samsung India Electronics Pvt. Ltd.,

24, Rajasekaran Street,

Dr.Radhakrishnan Salai,

Mylapore,

Chennai-600 004.

Rep.by its General Manager.

 

2. M/s. Alfa Refrigeration Co.

1A/1, Dhanakottiraja Street,

Sundar Nagar, Ekaduthangal,

Chennai-600 032.

Rep.by its Manager.

                                                                       ..  Opposite parties.

 

Counsel for the complainant                      : M/s. George Cheriyan and 2 other.

 

Counsel for   1^st opposite party                : M/s.V.V.Giridhar and 2 other

Counsel for   2^nd  opposite party               : Ex-parte.

 

ORDER

TMT. KAVITHA KANNAN,M.E.,  : MEMBER-I

          This complaint has been filed by the complainant against the opposite parties under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 prays to directing the 1^st Opposite party to replace the defective Air Conditioner bearing Model Name AS19FKXTL and product SI.No.A244PZBQ300543M supplied to the complainant or alternatively to refund the sum of Rs.22,990/- being the cost of the Air conditioner and to pay Rs.15,000/- as compensation to the complainant and directing the 2^nd opposite party to refund a sum of Rs.2,537/- to the complainant being the charges paid by the complainant and to pay the costs.

This complaint was originally filed before the District Commission, Chennai (South) and taken on file in C.C. No. 180/2012.  Thereafter, the said complaint has been transferred to this Commission as per the proceedings of the Hon’ble S.C.D.R.C. and taken on file as C.C. No.393/2018.

1.THE COMPLAINT IN BRIEF:

The complainant submits that he purchased a Samsung 1.5 ton split Air Conditioner a product of the 1^st opposite party from Rathna Cools Private Limited, vide Invoice No.14406, dated:11.08.2008 for a sum of Rs.22,990/-.  The complainant submitted that the Air conditioner is covered under warranty and compressor is covered under warranty for 60 months. The Air conditioner were installed and service maintenance was being taken care of the 2^nd opposite party. The complainant submitted that during March 2012 the Air conditioner had developed a serious defect resulting in the leakage of gas and the unit was rendered incapable of functioning. The complainant informed the 2^nd opposite party by letter dated 19.03.2012 and the technicians from the 2^nd opposite party checked the unit on 21.03.2012 and after some sort of patch up work declared that the defect is set right and assured good performance and charged a sum of Rs.2,537/- and paid by the complainant. The complainant submitted that thereafter in the month of May 2012 the complainant noticed the defects in the Air Conditioner and called service personal of 2^nd opposite party and checked the Air conditioner have declared that the gas has once again leaked out and to refill the shortage of gas. The complainant informed by letter to the 1^st opposite party on 29.05.2012 and envisaging that the leakage of gas in the Air conditioner is an intrinsic manufacturing defect and the complainant is entitled to reject the defective unit and call for a replacement. The complainant submitted that the 1^st opposite party having received the notice neither replied to the notice.  The complainant write another letter dated 18.06.2012 to the 1^st opposite party. The complainant prayed refund a sum of Rs.22990/- with compensation.

2.WRITTEN VERSION OF 1^st  OPPOSITE PARTY IN BRIEF:

The 1^st opposite party deny each and every averments made by the complainant as false and put the complainant in to strict proof of the same. The 1^st opposite party submitted that the complainant’s purchase from Ratna cools on 11.08.2008.  The problem complained ended in visit inspection and taking away the air conditioner on 21.03.2012.  It is pertinent that 1 years’ warranty hand ended, since air conditioner was purchased on 11.08.2008.  On refilling of gas, demand for service charges were made for work done, since warranty of 1 year had expired. The 1^st opposite party submitted that complaint in May 2012 was attended to the complainants’ various alleged letters said to be sent to this opposite party were not received. The 1^st opposite party stated that warranty given is 1 year, hence the question of 60 months does not hold good.  It is usual business practice do repairs on charge basis for warranty expired products. Hence the 1^st opposite party have not committed any deficiency of service.

3. POINTS FOR CONSIDERATION:

1. Whether there is any deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties as alleged in the complaint?

2. Whether the complainant is entitled to the reliefs prayed in the complaint. If, so to what extent?

The complainant had filed proof affidavit and documents Ex.A1 to Ex.A10 were marked on his side.The 1^st opposite party had filed written version, proof affidavit, written argument and no documents was marked on their side.The 2^nd opposite party were set Ex-parte.

4. Point No.1:-

The complainant purchased a Samsung 1.5Ton Split AC ,a product of opposite party 1 from Rathna Cools Pvt. Ltd., on 11-8-2008. The AC had been covered under warranty and specifically the compressor is covered under warranty for 60 months and comprehensive warranty for 12 months from the date of purchase. The complainant alleges in his complaint that in March 2012 the disputed AC showed some malfunction and water leakage followed by which the complainant complained about the malfunction of the AC and also prefers to attach for a monthly service by approved technicians to the opposite party 2 on 19-3-2012. The opposite party 2 being an Authorised dealer of Opposite Party 1 arranges for an authorised service for the A/C. The Opposite Party 2 service man who attended to the job of repair fixed the AC and assured the good working and performance and charged Rs.2096/- and Rs.441/- for gas refill and labour charge respectively. The complainant alleges that After two months of effective working the AC was observed with typical fault of gas leakage  ceaseless malfunction in the month of May 2012.  Further the complainant writes to the Opposite Party 1 on 29-5-2012 stating that the fault as Manufacturing defect and thereby demanding a replacement of the disputed AC with a brand  new defective free unit.  Further the complainant in his letter to the opposite party 1 alleges that the repeated defect of gas leakage and this expenditure towards the same of Rs.2000 every month is not acceptable. The Opposite Party 1 failed to reply and respond to the letter nor did they take any effort to replace the AC. The complainant again wrote to Opposite party1 regarding the complaint raised on 29-5-2012which was evaded and left unanswered by the Opposite Party 1.

5. The complainant filed Ex.A1 which is proof of purchase of Samsung 1.5 Ton Split AC paying a sum of Rs.22990/-. The Complainant in his complaint, Proof affidavit and Written argument contends that the split AC purchased from Ratna Cools Pvt.Ltd ,an Authorised seller of Opposite Party 1 suffered an intrinsic manufacturing defect of gas leakage since march 2012.

6. The complainant had filed the Customer Detail Warranty Card as Ex.A2 to prove that the AC was under 60 months warranty. But according to the Warranty conditions in Ex.A2 that the disputed AC purchased in August 2008 is covered under Comprehensive Warranty of 12 months means till august 2009 and Compressor carries a warranty of 60 months which would extend till august 2013.The letter by complainant regarding water leakage and deficiency in performance is marked as Ex.A3,Ex.A4 and Ex.A5 are the receipt of charges levied by Opposite party 1 for the labour charge and gas charging for the repair carried on the disputed AC.

7. Ex.A6 is marked for payment proof for the complainant.  EXA7 is marked to specify the communication according to which the complainant had written about his grievance towards malfunctioning of the AC repaired only 2 months ago and also calls for the quick settlement of the matter.  Ex.A8 is the postal acknowledgement of letter in Ex.A7. Ex.A9 is marked as letter from complainant to Opposite Party1 regarding the non response of Opposite party1 about letter dated 29/5/12.  And Ex.A10 is the postal acknowledgement of letter marked in Ex.A9.

8. Though the complainant alleges that the AC carries 60 months warranty, the warranty conditions in Ex.A2 states that only the compressor carries 60 months which is not disputed by the opposite party1. But errors such as gas leakage, PCB, condenser etc are categorised as comprehensive warranty. Which is only for 12 months. Hence the Defective AC cannot be replaced with a new one due to non coverage of warranty .

9. As the complainant alleges in written argument the repair work done on 21-3-2012 has not been effective since the same fault re-occurred within a short span of 2  months and the Opposite party 1 has evaded without replying and no further actions have been taken for the letters by the complainant on 29-5-2012(ExA7)and letter dated 18-6-12(Ex.A9) that alone will not constitute a deficiency in service on the part of opposite party. Since as per Ex.A2 the comprehensive warranty for the unit is only the 12 months and further as per very same Ex.A2 the air filter front gril and gas charging were not covered under the warranty.  The 2^nd opposite party has rightly charged and received amount as found in Ex.A4 and A5 for the work and service done by it and the complainant cannot seek refund of that amount of Rs.2537/- as claimed in the complaint.  The complainant failed to prove that the product manufactured by the 1^st opposite party is defective in nature and there is no proof to show that the leakage of gas was only due to the manufacturing defect. Admittedly the AC unit was purchased in August 2008 and was running without any fault till March 2012 for about four years and the defect even as per the complaint occurred only in March 2012 and hence the same cannot be taken as a manufacturing defect in the Air conditioner.  The complainant failed to prove that the opposite party 1 and 2 has committed in deficiency in service and unfair trade practice as alleged in the complaint. Point No.1 is answered accordingly.

10. Point No.2.

            Based on findings given to the Point.No.1 since there is no deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of Opposite parties, the complainant is not entitled for any relief Point no.2 answered accordingly.

          In the result, the complaint is dismissed. No costs.     

Dictated  by Member I to the Steno-Typist taken down, transcribed and computerized by him, corrected by the President and pronounced by us in the open Commission on this the 15^th day of September 2022.

 

MEMBER I                                  MEMBER – II                           PRESIDENT

LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE COMPLAINANT:

Ex.A1	11.08.2008	Invoice no.14406 for the Air conditioner issued by the Rathna cools Pvt.Ltd., to the complainant.
Ex.A2	11.08.2008	Customer details cum warranty card issued to the complainant.
Ex.A3	19.03.2012	Letter from complainant to the 2nd opposite party.
Ex.A4	21.03.2012	Receipt No.39370 issued by the 2nd opposite party to the complainant.
Ex.A5	21.03.2012	Receipt No.38187 issued by the 2nd opposite party to the complainant.
Ex.A6	22.03.2012	Cash payment voucher of the complainant.
Ex.A7	29.05.2012	Letter from complainant to 1st opposite party.
Ex.A8	31.05.2012	Postal acknowledgement card of the 1st opposite party.
Ex.A9	18.06.2012	Letter from complainant to 1st opposite party.
Ex.10	20.06.2012	Postal acknowledgement card of the 1st opposite party.

 

 

 

 

LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE  1^st OPPOSITE PARTY:

 

                                                          -NIL-

 

 

MEMER – I                           MEMBER – II                       PRESIDENT

 

 

 

CC/393/18

Points for consideration

1.whether there is unfair trade practice and deficiency of service on part of the  opposite party?

2. Whether the complainant is entitled for replacement of Split AC and other reliefs as prayed for in the complaint .If so ,to what extent?

Arguments of opposite party 1 heard.Opposite Party 2 set exparte .The complaint filed proof affidavit and EX A1-EX A10 were marked on his sidealong with written arguments.Proof Affidavit and Written Arguments filed by Opposite Party 1 and no documents filed.

Point #1

          The complainant purchased a Samsung 1.5Ton Split AC ,a product of OP1 from Rathna Cools Pvt.Ltd on 11-8-2-08.The AC had been covered under warranty and specifically the compressor is covered under warranty for 60 months and comprehensive warranty for 12 months from the date of purchase.The complainant alleges in his complaint that in March 2012 the disputed AC showed some malfunction and water leakage followed by which the complainant complained about the malfunction of the AC and also prefers to attach for a monthly service by approved technicians to the OP2 on 19-3-2012 .The OP2 being an Authorised dealer of Opposite Party1 arranges for an authorised service for the A/C.The Opposite Party 2 service man who attended to the job of repair fixed the AC and assured the good working and performance and charged Rs.2096/ and Rs.441/ for gas refill and labour charge respectively.The complainant allures that After two months of effective working the AC was observed with typical fault  of gas leakage  ceaseless malfunction in the month of May 2012.Further the complainant writes to the Opposite Party 1 on 29-5-2012 stating that the fault as Manufacturing defect and thereby demanding a replacement of the disputed AC with a brand  new defective free unit .further The complainant in his letter to the opposite party1 alleges that the repeated defect of gas leakage and this expend towards the same of Rs.2000 every month is not acceptable. The Opposite Party 1 failed to reply and respond to the letter nor did they take any effort to replace the AC.The complainant again wrote to Opposite party1 regarding the complaint raised on 29-5-2012which was evaded and left unanswered by the Opposite Party1.

The complainant filed Ex.A1 which is prof of purchase of Samsung 1.5 Ton Split AC paying a sum of RS.22990 vide Cheque No.         .The Complaianant in his complaint ,Proof affidavit and Written argument contests that the split AC purchased from RAtna Cools Pvt.Ltd ,an Authorised seller of Opposite Party1 suffered an intrinsic manufacturing defect of gas leakage since march 2012.

The complainant had filed the Customer Detail Warranty Card as EX.A2 to prove that the AC was under 60 months warranty.But according to the Warranty conditions in Ex.A2 that the disputed AC purchased in August 2008 is covered under Comprehensive Warranty of 12 months means till august 2009 and Compressor carries a warranty of 60 months which would extend till august 2013.The letter by complainant regarding water leakage and deficiency in performance is marked as EX.A3.EX A4 and EX.A5 is the receipt of charges levied by Opposite party1 for the labour charge and gas change for the repair carried on the disputed AC.

ExA6 is marked for payment proof for the complainant .EXA7 is marked to specify the communication according to which the complainant had written about his grievance towards malfunctioning of the AC repaired only 2 months ago and also calls for the quick settlement of the matter.EX.A8 is the postal acknowledgemet of letter in EX.A7.Ex A9 is marked as letter from complainant to Opposite Party1 regarding the non response of Opposite party1 about letter dated 29/5/12.And EX.A10 is the postal acknowledgement of letter marked in EX.A9.

Though the complainant alleges that the AC carries 60 months warranty ,the warranty conditions in EX.A2 states that only the compressor carries 60 months which is not disputed by the opposite party1.But errors such as gas leakage, PCB ,condenser etc are categorised as comprehensive warranty. Which is only for 12 months.Hence the Defective AC cannot be replaced with a new one due to non coverage of warranty .

As the complainant alleges in written arguement the repair work done on 21-3-2012 has not been effective since the same fault re-occurred within a short span of 2  months.And the Opposite party 1 has evaded without replying and no further actions have been taken for the letters by the complainant on 29-5-2012(ExA7)and letter dated 18-6-12(Ex.A9).Since the Opposite Party 1 is the authorised manufacturer and service provider of the AC holds liable to respond and guide his customers whether or not the product enjoys their warranty.Sincethe Opposite Party1 remained without replying the letterrs marked in EX.A7 and Ex.A9 deficiency of service is on part of Opposite Party1.Point no.1 answered accordingly.

Point no.2:

Since there is deficiency of sercice proved on account of the Opposite Party1 the Opposite party is directed to Pay a compensation of Rs.25000/ and Rs.5000/ towards litigation cost to the complainant within a period of 3 months faliing of which the complaianant is entitled to be paid the above cost along with 6% interest .

Hence the complaint is partly allowed and the complainant is entitled for a compensation of Rs.25000/ and Rs.5000/ towards cost of proceedings.