BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SIRSA.              

                                                          Consumer Complaint no. 101 of 2022.                                                                        

                                                           Date of Institution :    25.01.2022

                                                          Date of Decision   :    08.09.2023.

Pawan Saini, aged about 35 years son of Shri Jagdish Saini, resident of Chattergarh Patti, Tehsil and District Sirsa.

                                                                                      ……Complainant.

                             Versus.

1.  Shah Electronics, Rania Bazar Sirsa, District Sirsa through its Proprietor Pawan Kumar.

2. Indo Hitech Appliances Limited, A-13, Phase-II, Mangolpuri, Industrial Area, Delhi- 110034 through its Managing Director.

                                                                          ...…Opposite parties.

                   Complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

Before:       SHRI PADAM SINGH THAKUR…………….PRESIDENT.

                   SMT. SUKHDEEP KAUR………………… MEMBER.                                  

                 SH. OM PARKASH TUTEJA…………….. MEMBER     

Present:       Sh. Lalit Mehra, Advocate for complainant.

                   Sh. N.K. Daroliya, Advocate for opposite parties.

ORDER

                   In brief, the case of the complainant is that complainant purchased a Geyser / Electric water heater from op no.1 on 23.10.2020 and guarantee card with guarantee of two years was also issued. The op no.1 is authorized dealer and op no.2 is manufacturing company of said Heater. That just after purchase of said Heater in the month of November, 2021 the said Heater became faulty and it does not work properly and immediately complainant requested op no.1 to check the Heater and to remove the defect but all in vain and he has postponed the matter with one pretext or the others. It is further averred that on repeated requests, op no.1 misbehaved with complainant and asked him not to visit him and only to visit the manufacturer and refused to give any service to the complainant whereas the said Heater is still under guarantee period. That the act and conduct of the ops comes under the ambit of deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice due to which complainant is suffering serious harassment and mental agony. Hence, this complaint.

2.       On notice, ops appeared and filed written statement taking certain preliminary objections. It is submitted that ops provided warranty of the product with certain conditions like to use the product as per specification and way given in the broacher etc. Moreover, manufacturing company always mentions the guarantee/ warrantee conditions on the log book/ manual contained in Box of product which ought to go through by each customer and manufacturer also mentioned the list of their authorized service centre which are being run under the control of manufacturing company for providing time to time services to the customers. They also advised to the customers to get their complaint redressed from the authorized service centre. The complainant never approached to the service centre of answering op no.2 also. It is further submitted that complainant never approached the ops at any point of time. Moreover, complainant also failed to mention the description of the product as well as detail of invoice/ bill etc. and also type of defect in his complaint. The ops respect their customers and always ready to provide proper services and also believe on them but the complainant without approaching the ops and without producing the product at the service centre or shop of ops has filed this false complaint. Remaining contents of complaint are also denied to be wrong and prayer for dismissal of complaint made.

3.       The complainant in evidence has tendered his affidavit Ex. CW1/A and copies of documents i.e. warranty card with date of purchase issued by op no.1 as Ex.C1 and his adhar card as Ex.C2.

4.       On the other hand, ops have tendered affidavit of Sh. Anil Kumar, Proprietor of op no.1 as Ex. RW1/A and authority letter issued by op no.2 in favour of op no.1 as Ex.R1.

5.       We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the case file carefully.

6.       It is an admitted and proved fact on record that on 23.10.2020 complainant had purchased the Geyser in question from op no.1 which is manufactured by op no.2. The complainant has alleged defect in the Geyser in question from the month of November, 2021 and has asserted that his grievances have not been redressed by the op no.1 despite the fact that geyser was in guarantee period. On the other hand, ops have alleged that complainant never approached the ops regarding defect in the geyser and he has also failed to mention the description of the product as well as detail of invoice/ bill etc. and also type of defect in his complaint. However, from the warranty card placed on file by complainant as Ex.C1, it is evident that complainant purchased the geyser of Indo company from op no.1 and its serial number is also mentioned on the warranty card and it is also mentioned in Ex.C1 that geyser in question is manufactured by op no.2 and it is also mentioned in the warranty card that Indo water heaters comes with a warranty of two years for all electrical items including heating element and the SS tank. So in the month of November, 2021 as well as at the time of filing of present complaint, the geyser was under warranty and as per warranty card free repair will be provided under the warranty period when the water heater is returned to their service center freight paid. The complainant has alleged that he has visited to op no.1 in this regard and made repeated requests to check the geyser and to remove the defect but he has failed to do so. It is not believable that complainant has not visited op no.1 for redressal of his grievances as for redressal of his grievances when he can file the consumer complaint than he can also visit to op no.1. So, ops are liable to redress the grievances of complainant and to repair the geyser and to make it defect free. In these circumstances, complainant will have to hand over the geyser in question either to op no.1 or to service center of op no.2 and they will get repaired the geyser in question and will make it defect free without any costs.

7.       In view of our above discussion, we allow the present complaint and direct the opposite parties to get the geyser in question repaired from their service center, if any and to make it defect free even by replacing defective parts, if any without any costs. The complainant is directed to hand over the geyser in question to op no.1 or service center of op no.2 against proper receipt within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order and thereafter ops will make the geyser defect free within further period of 15 days. We also direct the ops to further pay a sum of Rs.3000/- as composite compensation for harassment and litigation expenses to the complainant within above said  period of 30 days.  A copy of this order be supplied to the parties as per rules. File be consigned to the record room.

Announced :                            Member      Member                          President,

Dated: 08.09.2023.                                                                  District Consumer Disputes

                                                                                             Redressal Commission, Sirsa.