Delhi

East Delhi

CC/466/2016

M.K WALI - Complainant(s)

Versus

SAMSUNG INDIA - Opp.Party(s)

19 Feb 2019

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM (EAST)

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

CONVENIENT SHOPPING CENTRE, FIRST FLOOR,

SAINI ENCLAVE, DELHI – 110 092

 

 

C.C. NO 466/16

 

M. K. Wali

S/o Late Wali Mohammad,

R/o D-64, Pocket-B, Mayur Vihar,

Phase-2, Delhi- 110091                          

…Complainant

Vs.

 

1. M/s Samsung India Electronic Pvt. Ltd.

20^th to 24^th Floor, Two Horizon Centre,

Golf Course Road, Sector- 43

DLF Ph-V, Gurgaon, Haryana- 122202

 

2. Kalpana Digital World

1/10, 12, Main Vikas Marg

Lalita Park, Laxmi Nagar,

Delhi-110092.

 

…Opposite parties

 

 

Date of Institution: 05.09.2016

Judgement Reserved on: 19.02.2019

Judgement Pronounced on: 20.02.2019

CORUM:

Sh. Sukhdev Singh (President)

Dr. P.N. Tiwari  (Member)

Ms. Harpreet Kaur Charya (Member)

Order By: Harpreet Kaur Charya (Member)

Judgement

Jurisdiction of this forum has been invoked by Shri M.K. Wali, the complainant against M/s Samsung India Electronics Pvt. Ltd., (OP-1) and Kalpana Digital World, (OP-2) with allegations of unfair trade practice and deficiency in services.

            On 12.03.2014, the complainant had purchased Samsung Refrigerator Model No. RT33FAJFAWX/TL for Rs. 28,700/- vide retail invoice no. K-05B60/13-14 from    OP-2 the Authorized Dealer of OP-1. The complainant was assured by OP-2 regarding the quality of the product manufactured by OP-1, which was under warranty upto 10 years. It has been stated that within few months of purchase, there was problem with the cooling of the product for which OP-2 was contacted who adjusted the settings of the refrigerator stating that due to high temperature in summer the cooling was ineffective. Again, there was problem with the refrigerator for which the complainant registered a complaint bearing no. 4219736300 with    OP-1, which was attended by technician from the service centre of OP-1 on 17.08.2016 and reported that the cooling was ineffective due to gas leak at the drier joint in the original fittings of the company. The complainant had stated that the technician demanded Rs.1,200/- for refilling of the gas, despite the fact that the product was in warranty. It has been stated that the product sold by OPs suffered from manufacturing defect for which a legal notice dated 24.0.2016 was sent which was neither replied nor complied. Feeling aggrieved, the complainant has prayed for directions to OPs to replace/ refund the cost of the refrigerator and Rs. 50,000/- as compensation for financial loss and mental harassment.

            The complainant has annexed retail invoice dated 12.03.2014, Customer Service Record Card dated 21.08.2016, copy of legal notice of dated 24.08.2016 alongwith speed post receipts and track report with the complaint.

            Notice of the present complaint was served upon OP-1 and OP-2. Thereafter written statement was filed by OP-1, where they have taken the plea that the allegations of defective refrigerator leveled by the complainant were not supported with any documentary evidence; the product in question carried warranty for a period of one year and 5 years on the compressor. It was submitted that the technician had visited the complainant on 16.07.2014 where the thermostat knob was adjusted, on 17.08.2016, it was observed that the cooling was ineffective as there was gas leakage due to drier joint in the original fittings by the company, which was repairable by filling gas subject to payment of 1,200/-, as the unit was out of warranty. It was the complainant who had denied to get the refrigerator repaired, thus, no deficiency in services could be attributed to OP. Rest of the contents have also been denied.

            OP-2 did not put appearance despite service, hence, they were proceeded ex-parte on 06.11.2017.

            Rejoinder to the written statement of OP-1 was filed by the complainant where, it was stated that the refrigerator was not working properly even after it was repaired by the technician of OP-1 on 11.09.2016, for which payment receipt bearing no. 146390 book no. 2928  for Rs. 1,250/- was issued. The contents of the complaint have been reaffirmed and those of written statement of OP-1 have been denied.

            Evidence by way of affidavit was filed by the complainant, where he has reiterated the averments made in the complaint.

            OP-1 has got examined Anindya Bose, Authorized Representative, who has also deposed on oath the contents of their written statement.

            We have heard the arguments on behalf of the Ld. Counsel for the Complainant and Ld. Counsel for OP-1. This complaint is regarding the inefficient/ ineffective cooling of the refrigerator, which was purchased on 12.03.2014, in support of his allegations the complainant has placed on record job sheet dated 21.08.2016. Perusal of the same under the head Repair Report (by engineer) “gas leak to drier joint in original fitting by company”. The said job sheet has been issued by the authorized service centre of OP-1, thus, it is amply clear that the problem in the cooling/ temperature was due to the reason mentioned above. Once the engineer of OP has mentioned that the problem was due to the original fitment by the company, thus, the complainant’s version cannot be doubted. Therefore, the complainant has been successful in proving his allegations. As far as the contention of OP-1 that the product was out of warranty, is concerned they have placed on record warranty terms and conditions stating that the product was out of warranty and their liability was only to replace the part, on chargeable basis, which has been denied by the complainant, does not hold good for the reason mentioned above. Hence, we allow the present complaint and direct OP-1 to replace the defective part free of cost and also give warranty for a period of 6 months from the date of replacement. We also award compensation of Rs. 7,500/- on account of mental harassment and agony.

            This order be complied within 30 days from the date of receipt of the order else compensation shall carry interest @9% from the date of order till realization.

Copy of the order be supplied to the parties as per rules.

            File be consigned to Record Room.

 

 (DR. P.N. TIWARI)                                          (HARPREET KAUR CHARYA) Member                                                                  Member

(SUKHDEV SINGH)

               President