Delhi

East Delhi

CC/196/2015

RANJAN - Complainant(s)

Versus

SAMSUNG - Opp.Party(s)

12 Aug 2015

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM (EAST)

GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI

                               CONVIENIENT SHOPPING CENTRE, SAINI ENCLAVE: DELHI-92

 

CASE NO-196/15

In the matter of:

Sh. Ranjan Agrawal,

R/O: D-197 Milan Apartment, C.R. Road

Laxmi Nagar, Delhi-110092

Complainant

Vs

Samsung Company

Authorized Service Centre: Kaiser Electronics

Plot No.455, FIE, Patparganj Delhi.

Opposite Party

 

                                                                                               DATE OF ADMISSION-15/04/2015

                                                                                                     DATE OF ORDER         -01/09/2015

SH. SUBHASH GUPTA (MEMBER)

The complainant bought Samsung Refrigerator RT27CDUX from Navrang Audio Pvt. Ltd. Vide Retail invoice No. 10130 dated 02/12/2011 for an amount of Rs. 16,500/- stopped working within 10 months. The OP changed with a new one on 25/09/2012, after about 2 years same problem occurred. The OP on complaint got it examined and as there was leakage of gas for which complaint said Rs.1200/-. It is alleged in the complaint that OP is ready to refund 37% of the cost and OP will take back the Refrigerator which is not acceptable to me. The complainant has prayed for refund of Rs.16,500/- as cost of Refrigerator and Rs.70,000/- as compensation towards mental harassment and torture.

            Notice of complaint was served on OP who has filed his WS (Reply). In its reply it has admitted sale of Refrigerator on 02/12/2011 and replacement on 25/09/2012. It has been pleaded that the complaint has arisen after two years and as the product was one of warranty, the complaints were attended on chargeable basis. The OP has leveled unsubstantiated allegations which are not relevant to the present case.

            Both the parties have filed their Affidavits in support of their case reiterating the contentions rose in the complaint and written statement.

            We have heard the parties gone through the documents traced on file. It is apparent from the record that the new Refrigerator was replaced on 25/09.2012 and the complainant made complaint on 29/11/2014 i.e. after the period of expiry of warranty. Apart from this there is no complaint about the compressor of the refrigerator which has 5 years warranty, as such we find no deficiency in services provided by the OP. the complaint has no merits, hence dismissed.  

 

SUBHASH GUPTA                               POONAM MALHOTRA                                   N.A.ZAIDI

      MEMBER                                                MEMBER                                                            PRESIDENT