Punjab

Sangrur

CC/1177/2015

Diya - Complainant(s)

Versus

Samsung India Electronics - Opp.Party(s)

Shri R.K.Guliani

05 May 2016

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SANGRUR.

             

                                                Complaint No.  1177

                                                Instituted on:    29.09.2015

                                                Decided on:       05.05.2016

 

Diya minor daughter of Khushwinder Kumar, under the guardianship of her father namely Khushwinder Kumar son of Ved Parkash, resident of H. No. 305, Sekhupura Mohalla, Roxy Road, Sangrur, Tehsil and District Sangrur.

                                                        …Complainant

                                Versus

1.             Samsung India Electronics Pvt. Ltd. Ground floor, Front Tower, Mohan Co-operative Industrial Estate, New Delhi-110 044 through its M.D.

2.             Jaispy Service Centre, Near C.L. Tower, Nankiana Chowk, Kishanpura Road, Sangrur through its Prop.

3.             Shree Ganesh Traders, Patiala Gate, Sangrur, through its Prop.

                                                        …Opposite parties

 

 

For the complainant  :               Shri R.K.Guliani, Adv.

For OP No.1             :               Shri  J.S.Sahni, Adv.

For OP No.2&3         :               Exparte.

 

 

Quorum:   Sukhpal Singh Gill, President

                K.C.Sharma, Member

                Sarita Garg, Member

 

Order by : Sukhpal Singh Gill, President.

 

1.             Ms. Diya, complainant through her father Khushwinder Kumar, complainant  (referred to as complainant in short) has preferred the present complaint against the opposite parties (referred to as OPs in short) on the ground that the complainant purchased one Samsung Microwave Oven bearing model number MW-CE-73 JD B/XTL MW Samsung TF  from OP number 3 for Rs.10,500/- vide bill dated 09.10.2014 with a warranty of one year. It is further averred in the complaint that after one month of the purchase of microwave, it started to give multiple problems such as, not displaying the number regarding heat/temperature and further developed so many defects.  As such, the complainant immediately approached OP number 3, who advised the complainant to visit OP number 2 i.e. service centre of the company and the complainant approached OP number 2 and further handed over the microwave oven to OP number 2 and after admitting the defect/problem in the microwave oven, OP number 2 retained it without issuance of any job card/job sheet to the complainant. It is further averred that OP number 2 advised the complainant to get the microwave after one week, as such, he approached OP number 2 after one week and the OP number 2 returned the same after its repairs.  It is further averred that again on 1.8.2015, the microwave in question stopped working permanently and the complainant approached OP number 2 on 10.8.2015, who retained the microwave and advised to get the same after one week.  The complainant visited OP number 2 after one week to get the same, but the OP number 2 returned the microwave to the complainant without conducting any repairs saying that it is suffering from manufacturing defects and the defect is not curable.  As such, the complainant requested OP number 2 to replace it with a new one or to refund its price, but nothing happened despite serving of legal notice dated 28.8.2015 upon the OPs.  Thus, alleging deficiency in service on the part of the Ops, the complainant has prayed that the Ops be directed to replace the above said microwave oven with a new one of the same make and model or in the alternative to refund him the purchase price of the microwave oven i.e. Rs.10,500/- along with interest @ 18% per annum from the date of its purchase and further claimed compensation and litigation expenses.

 

2.             Record shows that OP number 2 and 3 did not appear despite service, as such OP number 2 and 3 were  proceeded exparte on 27.11.2015.

 

3.             In the reply filed by OP number 1, preliminary objections are taken up on the grounds that the complaint is a gross abuse of the process of law and is based on false, frivolous and baseless allegations. It is stated that the microwave oven of the complainant was submitted with OP number 2 on 10.8.2015 for the first time and reported problem was duly rectified and it was delivered back to the complainant in OK condition to her satisfaction.  It is further stated that the performance of the microwave oven depends upon the physical handling by the user. It has been averred that the OP through reply requested the Forum to direct the complainant to submit his microwave before the Forum for inspection and independent expert opinion regarding the exact condition of the product as required under the law. It is further averred that the complainant never approached OP after 10.8.2015 with any kind of problem.  On merits, it has been admitted that the complainant had purchased the microwave in question from OP number 3 vide bill dated 09.10.2014 for Rs.10,500/- with a warranty of one year.  The allegations levelled in the complaint have been denied in toto. However, it is stated that the complainant never brought his microwave before 10.8.2015 and when the microwave was brought on 10.8.2015, it was duly repaired and the problem was rectified.  It has been stated further that the alleged report of Sharma Electronics is totally fabricated and biased report prepared at the instance of the complainant to further his totally false allegations.  However, lastly, the OP has prayed for dismissal of the complaint with special costs.

 

4.             The learned counsel for the complainant has produced Ex.C-1  and Ex.C-2 affidavits, Ex.C-3 copy of legal notice, Ex.C-4 and Ex.C-5 postal receipts, Ex.C-6 copy of bill, Ex.C-7 copy of job sheet, Ex.C-8 copy of expert report dated 15.9.2015 and closed evidence.

 

 

5.             We have carefully perused the complaint, version of the opposite parties and heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties. In our opinion, the complaint merits acceptance, for these reasons.

 

 

6.               It is an admitted fact that the complainant purchased one Samsung microwave from OP number 1 vide bill dated 09.10.2014 for Rs.10,500/-, a copy of which on record is Ex.C-6. It is further an admitted fact of the complainant that after one month of its purchase, the microwave in question suffered problems of not displaying the number regarding heat/temperature, as such, he took the same to OP number 2, who repaired the same and returned to the complainant. But, again it stopped working on 1.8.2015 and as such, the complainant approached OP number 2 on 10.8.2015, but the OP number 2 failed to set it right saying that it suffers from manufacturing defects. As such, the complainant requested the Ops for its replacement or refund of the price of the microwave, but all in vain despite serving of legal notice, a copy of which on record is Ex.C-3 and the postal receipts are Ex.C-4 and Ex.C-5. On the other hand, the stand of the OP number 1 is that the complainant never approached Op number 2 i.e service centre for any repairs.  But, it is worth mentioning here that the Op number 2 failed to put appearance and chose to remain exparte and did not file even written reply to deny this allegation of the complainant. We may further mention that the complainant has also produced the expert report dated 15.9.2015 of one Sharma Electronics Works, Sangrur Ex.C-8 to support his allegations in the complaint. Further the OP number 1 has also produced the expert report of Nachattar Singh of the service engineer of OP number 2 on record as Ex.OP1/3 stating that the microwave does not suffer from any manufacturing defect.  In these circumstances, we feel that the report of Nachhattar Singh Ex.OP1/3 carries no weight as it is obvious that Nachhattar Singh being the employee of the OP number 2 will naturally support the Ops and will submit the report in favour of OPs.  There is no explanation from the side of the OPs number 2 and 3 that why they did not join the proceedings before the Forum and chose to remain exparte. As such, we feel that it is a clear cut case of deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs. 

 

 

7.             In view of our above discussion, we allow the complaint of the complainant and direct OPs to refund to the complainant an amount of Rs.10,500/- along with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the present complaint i.e. 29.09.2015 till realisation, however, subject to the returning of the microwave in question with all its accessories, if any at the time of getting the payment.  The OPs shall also pay to the complainant an amount of Rs.2500/- in lieu of litigation expenses.

 

 

8.             This order of ours be complied with within a period of thirty days of its communication. A copy of this order be issued to the parties free of cost. File be consigned to records.

                Pronounced.

                May 5, 2016.

 

                                                (Sukhpal Singh Gill)

                                                     President

                               

 

                                                   (K.C.Sharma)

                                                        Member

 

 

                                                    (Sarita Garg)

                                                       Member