IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KOLLAM
DATED THIS THE 1St DAY OF August 2018
Present: - Sri. E.M.Muhammed Ibrahim, B.A, LLM. President
Sri. M.Praveen Kumar,Bsc, LLB ,Member
CC.No.313/2016
Sunil Kumar.V : Complainant
Lalitha Mandhiram
Mathira P.O
Kadakkal -6
V/S
1. Service in charge : Opposite parties
S.S. service (Godrej)
Near Pranav Hospital
Kizhakkekara
Kottarakkara – 691 506
2. The CEO
Godrej and Boyce
Manufacturing Company Ltd
Pirojsha Nagar
Vikhroli, Mumbai – 400 079
ORDER
SRI. M. PRAVEEN KUMAR, MEMBER
This case is based on a consumer complaint filed by Sunilkumar.V against 2 opposite parties seeking an amount of Rs.5000/- as compensation and Rs.2000/- as costs of the proceedings.
The averment in the complaint in short are as follows:-
Complainant had purchased a refrigerator styled Godrej Edge on 20/08/2011. Complainant made a complaint on 15/07/2016 numbered 752588 to the opposite parties regarding the defect of the refrigerator. As per the complaint,
(2)
mechanic of opposite parties visited complainant’s residence on 21/07/2016 and charged Rs.345/- for servicing. At the time of servicing the service mechanic told the complainant that door of the refrigerator is rusted and they will replace or repaint the same within 30days. After one month they have not responded or not cured the said defects. On enquiry complainant came to know that his complaint was closed on 26/08/2016 without giving any service. Again he forwarded another complaint and repeated emails for re open the complaint. The opposite parties reopened the matter with complaint No.640526 dated 09/10/2016. There after opposite parties changed the door of the refrigerator on 03/11/2016 with different colour . The complainant asked the mechanic about the colour change of the said door. Then the mechanic replied that same colour paint or door is not available with them as the model is outdated. Opposite party company given guarantee for a period of 10 years for rust protection plan. But the company did not give warranty as per their promise. The 1st opposite party charged the money from the complainant and given false information to the 2nd opposite party company and closed the complaint and as per the call centre records opposite parties closed the complaint on 26/08/2016 stating that defect rectified. Hence the complainant approached the Forum for getting relief from the opposite parties.
Though opposite parties received notice from this Forum they have neither appeared nor filed any written version and hence they were set exparte on 02/05/2018.
(3)
Points for consideration :-
1.Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties?
2.Whether complainant is entitled to get the amount claimed in the complaint with interest and as prayed for in the complaint?
3. Reliefs and costs?
The complainant filed chief affidavit and got marked Ext P1 and P2 documents. Opposite parties remain exparte.
Points No.1 and 2:-
According to the complainant he had purchased a refrigerator styled as Godrej Edge on 20/08/2011. Later the said refrigerators door got rusted and the complainant made a complaint on 15/07/2016 which was numbered as 752588. The mechanic visited complainants residence and charged Rs.345/- for servicing the refrigerator. On 03/11/2016 opposite parties replaced the door of the refrigerator with different colour. Ext.P1 warranty card would establish that the said Godrej refrigerator is having 10 years rust protection warranty. As per Ext.P1 opposite parties 2 promised that in the unlikely event of found rust formation on any painted surface of the refrigerator within a period of 10 years from the date of purchase , they offered to make good ie repaint the part/entire refrigerator free of cost. On 21/07/2016 complainant paid Rs.345/- to the 1st opposite party for servicing the
(4)
refrigerator. Ext.P2 receipt would prove that complainant had paid Rs.345/- to the 1st opposite parties for servicing.
The unchallenged averments in the affidavit coupled with Ext.P1 and P2 documents would establish that the complainants refrigerator got rusted within the warranty period and opposite parties failed to replace the door of the refrigerator with same colour. It is also clear from the available materials that the opposite parties replaced the door with different colour. The above act of the opposite parties would come under the purview of deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. Therefore complainant is entitled to get the relief as prayed for.
The points answered accordingly.
Points No.3:-
In the result complaint stands allowed , directing the opposite parties to pay Rs.5000/- or replace the refrigerator with new one of the same features to the complainant and also pay Rs.2000/- as costs of the proceedings.
The opposite parties No.1 and 2 shall comply with the above directions with in 45 days failing which the complainant is entitled to realize an amount of Rs.7000/- with interest @12% per annum from the date of filing the complaint till realization from opposite parties 1 and 2 jointly and severally and from their assets.
(5)
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant Smt.Vijimole.G transcribed and typed by her corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 1st day of August 2018.
E.M.Muhammed Ibrahim:Sd /-
M.Praveen Kumar: Sd /-
Forwarded/by Order
Senior Superintendent
INDEX
Witnesses Examined for the Complainant-Nil
Documents marked for the complainant
Ext.P.1:- Warranty
Ext/P.2:- Receipt from S.S service dated 21/07/2016,
Witnesses examined for the opposite parties-Nil
Documents marked for the opposite parties-Nil
E.M.Muhammed Ibrahim:Sd/-
M.Praveen Kumar:Sd/-
Forwarded/by Order
Senior Superintendent
