Order-9.
Date-06/07/2015. .
This is an application u/s.12 of the C.P. Act, 1986.
Complainant by filing this complaint has submitted that he purchased one washing machine of Samsung make from Samsung Plaza vide cash Memo No.SMPL/03152 dated 28-09-2013 for Rs.30,000/- but just after purchase it was found that it was defective and same was not functioning and there were some large scratches on the wall of the machine and warranty card has not been handed over to the complainant and in fact, it appears that the 2nd hand washing machine was delivered to the complainant and on the basis of the complaint of the complainant engineer-cum-mechanic or representative of OP1 Samsung India Electronics Pvt. Ltd. came to the complainant’s house and repaired and, thereafter, the washing machine began to work for few months and after that it stopped functioning when it was detected that it is not at all a new one.
Subsequently, complainant complained over phone and in writing also for replacement by providing new washing machine along with warranty card but they did not respond when complainant took shelter to CA&FBP, Kolkata, thereafter, CA&FBP reported that OP did not respond for which complainant was asked to file this complaint before Forum for redressal. Accordingly, complainant filed this complaint for negligent and deficient manner of service and also for selling a defective washing machine and for replacement and alternatively prayed for refund of purchase money amounting to Rs.30,000/- and compensation etc.
Fact remains notices were served upon both the OPs but even after receipts of the notices OPs did not turn up to contest the case for which the case is heard ex parte.
Decision with Reasons
Fact remains this complaint was filed by the complainant on 20-04-2015 and after considering the complaint including the material document that is the purchase voucher it is found that complainant purchased one washing machine of Samsung India Electronics Pvt. Ltd. from OP2 M/s. Samsung Plaza on 28-09-2013 on payment of Rs.30,000/- and it is the case of the complainant that after purchase it was found that the said machine was not functioning properly and it was found some long scratches on the wall of machine. Matter was reported to the OP1 Samsung Electronics Authority and after waiting they came and repaired the same but they did not replace the same and even after repair it was not functioning properly for which the complainant prayed for replacement of the same or refund of the purchase price but OPs did not pay any heed for which complainant lodged a complaint before the CA&FBP sent notices to the OP but OP did not turn up for which he was asked to file complaint in this Forum for negligent and deficient manner of service and also for not acting as per warranty clause of the washing machine and it is the apprehension of the complainant that the said machine is not only defective but an old one.
All these allegations are made against the seller and the manufacturer that is OPs 2 and 1. Both of them received summons but did not turn up to contest the case. Truth is that the purchase was made on 28-09-2013 and complaint was filed on 20-04-2015 but fact remains complainant has failed to produce the warranty card. It is the allegation of the complainant that warranty card was not handed over to the complainant at the time of purchase but it had its warranty for two years and within warranty period the said machine did not function properly again and again and said machine failed to function that was reported. One occasion it was repaired by the OP1’s representative, engineer, mechanic but ultimately no permanent solution was given by the OPs1 and 2 by repairing the same for which the said set is lying in the house of the complainant as a damaged article. In all respect of the above allegations complainant has filed one letter received by the Samgung Plaza and it is of dated 18-11-2013 and by that letter complainant reported that complainant made allegation about different types of scratch marks on the washing machine, non-supply of manual and warranty card and at that time complainant brought allegation against Samsung Plaza that old machine has been sold or defective machine has been sold even after receipt of the said letter by the OP2. No step was taken by the OP2. Thereafter, complainant again sent another reminder to OP2 mentioning that same fact and also prayed for handing over a new machine and that letter was also received by the OP subsequently another reminder was sent on 25-01-2014 mentioning previous matters and also for delivering a new machine in place of that old one but OP2 did not respond or did not take any step. Subsequently on 25-09-2014 complainant submitted a letter to the OP1 which was received by the OP1 on 25-09-2014 and by that letter complainant brought such allegation and prayed for replacement of the said washing machine but that was not entertained by the OP1 and finding no other alternative complainant filed a complaint before CA&FBP and CA&FBP took up the matter, sent notices to the OPs but they did not turn up and the authority failed to mediate the matter and asked the complainant to file this complaint before Forum.
When OPs have not appeared and denied the allegation of the complainant then invariably we must have to rely upon those documents which are referred above for determining this consumer dispute. It is no doubt a fact that complainant purchased the said washing machine on payment of Rs.30,000/- to the OP2 and just after purchase complainant pointed out the defects, non-supply of warranty card by the OP2 but OP2 did not respond even after three letters. Fact remains in one occasion the representative, engineer and mechanic of OP1 repaired it but even after that no fruitful result was achieved by the complainant to run the said machine. So, invariably the allegation of the complainant is unchallenged. Evidence of the complainant is no doubt unchallenged testimony and relying upon those documents including the non-appearance of the OP before CA&FBP at the time of mediation proceedings also support that OPs have their no say to challenge the allegation for which they did not turn up. Similarly, they did not turn up before this Forum even after receipt of the notices and also OP1 did not turn up even after receipt of the copy of E-chief, sent by this Forum by registered post with A/D and that was received by the OP which is proved from the internet postal result also. So, considering the negative attitude of the OP and their non-appearance before CA&FBP or Forum to challenge the allegation of the complainant it is proved that they have their no say or defence to challenge the allegation of the complainant for which they did not turn up and in view of the above position we are inclined to hold that the allegation as made by the complainant is no doubt believable and reliable for which the case of the complainant is proved against the OPs and no doubt the OPs are bound to replace the same or to refund the said amount when the defects are found within one year from the date of purchase of the said machine by the complainant from the OP2 manufactured by OP1.
In the result, the case succeeds as the negligent and deficient manner of service is well proved and at the same time as per warranty clause they have not got any service and ultimately the machine became useless one within one year from the date of this purchase when warranty was there.
Hence,
Ordered
That the case be and the same is allowed ex parte against both the OPs with a cost of Rs.5,000/- each against each of the OPs.
OPs are jointly and severally hereby directed to replace the said washing machine by a new one or to refund Rs.30,000/-, the price money of the said washing machine within one month from the date of this order failing which for non-compliance of the Forum’s order OPs are jointly and severally shall have to pay penal damages to the extent of Rs.10,000/- which shall be deposited to this Forum.
If OPs fail to comply the order in that case penal action shall be started against them for which further penalty and fine shall be imposed.
