Delhi

North East

CC/24/2020

Mohd. Yaqub - Complainant(s)

Versus

Sargam India Electronic Pvt. Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

07 Jun 2023

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION: NORTH-EAST

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

D.C. OFFICE COMPLEX, BUNKAR VIHAR, NAND NAGRI, DELHI-93

 

Complaint Case No.24/20

 

In the matter of:

 

	Mohd. Yaqub, S/o Mohd. Iqbal, R/o H.No. 683, Street No. 27, Indra Chowk, Jafrabad, Delhi 110053	Complainant
	Versus
1.         2.	The Manager Sargam India Electronics Pvt. Ltd., Add: A-1, Kanti Nagar Extension, Main Road, Delhi 110051   Samui Electronics Private Ltd., Registered office : 10179, Second Floor, Abdul Aziz Road West Extension Area, Karol Bagh, Delhi 110005	Opposite Parties

 

DATE OF INSTITUTION: JUDGMENT RESERVED ON:                   DATE OF ORDER:

12.03.2020 15.05.2023 07.06.2023

 

CORAM:

Surinder Kumar Sharma, President

Anil Kumar Bamba, Member

 

                                                                  ORDER

 Anil Kumar Bamba, Member

The Complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 35 of the    Consumer protection Act, 2019.

Case of the Complainant

1. The case of the Complainant as revealed from the record is that the on 22.05.2017, the Complainant purchased a SAC SAMUI SIK25-F5 @ ton air conditioner for a sum of Rs. 26,000/- from Opposite Party No. 1. At the time of purchasing the said product, the Opposite Party No. 1 gave full one year warranty on behalf of Opposite Party No. 2 on the said product. At same time, the Complainant extended the warranty of the said product for three years from Opposite Party No. 1 by paying the amount of Rs. 4,500/-. On 22.05.2019, the said AC was not working properly because of some defected in the said AC including improper cooling and gas problem. The Complainant made a complaint to  Opposite Party No. 1 regarding nor working of AC. The Complainant also complaint about the malfunctioning of the said AC to the Opposite Party No. 1 through Whats App massage on 22.05.2019. The Representative of the Opposite Party No. 1 replied as “Complaint Noted”. It is further stated that when the Complainant complaint about the malfunctioning of the said AC to the Opposite Party No. 1 then the Opposite Party No. 1 send their engineer to the residence of the Complainant for servicing the said AC and after checking the said AC the engineer of the Opposite Party No. 1 told to the Complainant that the compressor of the said AC is damaged and need to replace with new one.  After that the Complainant contacted to Opposite Party No. 1 and explained about the damaged compressor of the said AC and requested to replace it with new one as the AC was under warranty period. The representative of the Opposite Party No. 1 replied to the Complainant that Opposite Party No. 2 had been closed therefore the compressor of the said AC could neither be repaired nor replaced. On 18.11.2019, the Complainant again complaint to the Opposite Party No. 1 about the fault of the said AC but no action had been taken till today and all requests of the Complainant went into vein. On 26.12.2019, Complainant sent a legal notice to the Opposite Parties but Opposite Parties had not taken any steps to repair the said AC. The Complainant has prayed to direct the Opposite Parties to replace the defective compressor of the said AC with new compressor, Rs. 15,000/- on account of mental harassment and Rs. 10,000/- on account of litigation expenses.
2. None has appeared on behalf of Opposite Parties to contest the case. Therefore, Opposite Parties were proceeded against Ex-parte vide order dated 18.04.2022.

Ex-parte evidence of the Complainant

3. The Complainant in support of her complaint filed her affidavit wherein she has supported the averments made in the complaint.

Arguments & Conclusion

4. We have heard the Complainant and we have also perused the file.  The averments made by the Complainant in the complaint are supported by her affidavit and documents filed by her. The Opposite Party did not appear and did not file any written statement. Therefore, the averments made in the complaint are to be believed.
5.  In view of the above discussion, it is admitted that the extended warranty of three years of the said AC was given by the Opposite Party No. 1 and the compressor of the said AC was damaged during the extended period. Hence, there is a deficiency of service on behalf of Opposite Party No. 1. Therefore, the complaint is allowed. Opposite Party No. 1 is directed to replace the defective compressor with a new one and pay an amount of Rs. 10,000/- to the Complainant on account of mental harassment and litigation expenses along with interest @ 6 % p.a. from the date of this order till recovery.
6. Order announced on 07.06.2023.

Copy of this order be given to the parties free of cost

File be consigned to Record Room.

(Anil Kumar Bamba)           Member

(Surinder Kumar Sharma) President