SRI. SAJEESH.K.P    : MEMBER

    The complainant has  filed this complaint  under Sec.35 of the Consumer Protection Act 2019,  seeking direction against the  OPs to  pay an amount of Rs.81,481/- towards the price of the  refrigerator and to pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation for the  mental agony and hardship  caused to the  complainant .

Complaint in brief :-

   On 21/11/2015, complainant purchased a refrigerator from  the shop of 3^rd OP worth Rs.81,481/- with 10 years compressor warranty and 5 years warranty for other units, which was manufactured by 1^st OP.  To the surprise  of complainant, the refrigerator started to show various defects and 3^rd OP attended to issue and resolved temporarily.  But, all effort to rectify the defects went in vein as the defects persisted and complainant faced mental agonies due to the failure of proper refrigeration. On 28/5/2020, due to  the gas leakage from  refrigerator, complainant took the refrigerator to the service center of 1^st OP and to the  utter dismay , OPs 2&3 told that they are ready to take back the refrigerator and will pay Rs.20,000/- to complainant, as the defect is incurable.  The complainant purchased  refrigerator for Rs.81,481/-.  Moreover, complainant constrained to purchase another refrigerator for her use.  Hence, the complainant sustained mental agony and hardship due to the poor quality and inherent damage of refrigerator manufactured by 1^st OP.  Hence this complaint.

          After filing the complaint, commission sent notice  to both parties. All OPs  received the notice . OPs 1&3 entered appearance before the commission and filed their version.  2^nd OP received the notice and not appeared before the commission and not filed any version.  So the commission came to be proceed against 2^nd OP is  set exparte.

Version of  OP.NO.1 in brief:

    The 1^st OP denied the entire averment except those specifically admitted. The purchase of refrigerator was admitted.  But the complainant approached  service center(2^nd OP) on 9/2/2020 due to the internal leakage and the defect is non-repairable.  The product has standard  warranty only for one year and the  complainant approached OP after using the product for near about 5 years.  As the refrigerator within 5-10 years usage the 1^st OP can give only 10% refund but this OP offered Rs.20,000/- which was denied by complainant. The 2^nd OP provided all possible services and always tried for amicable settlement and also ready to provide service to complainant as and when requires as per the provisions.  Hence the 1^st OP contended that there is no deficiency in service from the part of 1^st OP and hence the complaint is liable to be dismissed.

Version of 3^rd OP in brief:

    The 3^rd OP denied all averments except those specifically admitted.  The purchase of refrigerator was admitted , and the complainant contacted 3^rd OP in the month of May 2020 and 3^rd OP advised complainant to approach authorized service center of 1^st OP.  The 3^rd OP contended that they have no idea about  the defects if any.  From the averment itself it is clear that  complainant is trying to dispose the refrigerator and also trying to get compensation from OPs.  Moreover, the gas leakage as complainant contended can be easily rectified without causing any heavy financial burden.  The 3^rd OP is only a dealer and has no role to compensate the complainant.  There is no bonafide intention in the complaint and  hence it is liable to be dismissed.

          Due to the rival contentions raised by the OPs to the litigation, the commission decided to cast the issues  accordingly.

1. Whether there is any deficiency in service from the side of  OPs?
2. Whether there is any  compensation  &  cost to the complainant?

       In order to answer the issues, the commission called evidence from both parties. The  complainant produced documents which is marked as Exts.A1 to A6 and Ext.C1.   Ext.A1 is the cash bill  issued by  3^rd OP dtd.21/11/2015, Ext.A2 is the receipt issued by 2^nd OP dtd.28/5/2020, Ext.A3 is the cash receipt issued by  2^nd OP, Ext.A4 is copy of  lawyer notice issued to OPs dtd.8/1/2021, Exts.A5&A6 reply notice of OPs 1&3.  Ext.C1 is the expert commission report.  The complainant adduced evidence  through proof  affidavit and examined as PW1.  After the  examination  of PW1, the Expert commissioner examined  as PW2.  From the side of  1^st OP has no oral evidence or documentary evidence.  3^rd OP adduced evidence through proof affidavit and examined as DW1.  No document produced by 3^rd OP.

     Let us  have a clear glance into the evidences brought  before the commission to peruse    in order to answer the issues raised.  The both issues are clubbed together for the sake of  convenience .

    In order to answer the issues of deficiency in service, let us discuss the exhibits one by one.  As there is no dispute with regard to the purchase or purchase price between the parties to the  complaint  no detailed discussion is necessary  on the basis of Ext.A1.  The other document Ext.A2, which was issued by 2^nd OP shows that complainant has raised some sort of complaint which was looked into and from the affidavit of complainant and version of 3^rd  OP clearly stated that the complainant produced the refrigerator before the service center of 1^st OP, ie 2^nd OP.  Ext.A3, which has no specific date indicate the payment of Rs.2600/- to 2^nd OP for the service provided to complainant.  There is no evidence before the commission to prove that the defect of refrigerator occurred within days of purchase.  But according to the version of 1^st OP, they admitted that the defect crept with  refrigerator is arise after  5 years of purchase and it is clear from the date  specified in Ext.A2 which was issued by the authorized service center of 1^st OP(2^nd OP).  Moreover, the  1^st  OP herein clearly admitted that there is leakage of  condenser and it is non-repairable.  This contention was admitted by the expert  whose report was marked as Ext.C1.  As the Ext.C1 is before the  commission and this commission is specyfing  only those relevant points which  was reported by the  expert commissioner.  As per Ext.C1, there  is a leakage of internal  body condenser  leak  and the defect is irrepairable.  The expert also specifies that the  compressor cannot be functioned as it done earlier.  Even though, the complainant has not produced warranty, there is no dispute with regard to the warranty of  compressor.  All the OPs admitted warranty of compressor.  Moreover, the 1^st OP was ready to provide only 20% of the purchase money even though they admitted that the defect is irrepairable.  The Ext.C1 specifically indicates the defect is irrepairable and hence the commission found that there is deficiency in service from the part of all OPs and hence liable to compensate the complainant for the hardship  she sustained even after the payment of huge amount.

           In the result complaint is allowed in part, the  opposite parties  1 to 3 are jointly and severally directed to  pay Rs.81,481/- which is the price of  refrigerator purchased by the complainant  and  also pay Rs. 10,000/- as compensation  for mental agony and  Rs.10,000/- as  cost of litigation to the complainant  within 30 days of receipt of this order.  In default  the amount of Rs. 81,481/- carries  interest @10% per annum from the date of order  till realization . After compliance of the order opposite parties are at liberty to take back the refrigerator from the complainant.  Failing which complainant is at liberty to file execution application against  opposite parties as per the provisions of Consumer Protection Act 2019.

Exts:

A1-Cash bill

A2&A3- Receipt

A4- lawyer notice

A5&A6- Reply notice by OPs 1&3

C1- Expert Commission report

PW1-Fousiya Abdul Maris -complainant.

PW2- Wilcent.L- witnesses  of PW1

DW1-Prashobkumar.K-3^rd OP

Sd/                                                                     Sd/                                                     Sd/

PRESIDENT                                             MEMBER                                         MEMBER

Ravi Susha                                       Molykutty Mathew                                    Sajeesh K.P

eva           

                                                                     /Forwarded by Order/

                                                                   ASSISTANT REGISTRAR