O R D E R
SUBHASH GUPTA, MEMBER
The complainant has filed the present complaint against the O.P. u/sec. 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The brief facts as alleged in the complaint are that the complainant had purchased a Videocon Fridge 190 ltr. Model S-192 GLX for a sum of Rs.9,000/- only manufactured by the O.P-1 through its authorized dealers i.e. O.P-2 vide sale invoice No.9373 dated 08.12.2009. It is further alleged that O.P-2 gave a warranty for 7 years against he said product. It is further pleaded that on the allurement and inducement by O.P-1 & 2 the complainant had purchased the said fridge. It is further pleaded that the complainant took a contract of AMC w.e.f. 12.06.2014 to 11.06.2015 from O.P-3 by paying Rs.1,500/- despite the fridge being under period of warranty of 7 years. It has been pleaded in the complaint that the fridge right after the purchase of it caused problem but O.P-1 & 2 failed to remove and rectify the defects. It is also pleaded that in the first week of August, 2014 the said fridge stopped working and a complaint to this effect was made to the O.Ps but to no effect. The complainant has pleaded inherent manufacturing defects in the product. The complainant has alleged that a legal notice was also served on the O.Ps but neither the reply of notice nor they rectified the defects. The complainant vide the present complaint is seeking replacement of the defective fridge or refund of the entire cost of the said fridge i.e. Rs.9,000/- with AMC charged of Rs.1,500/- alongwith interest @ 18% per annum. The complainant is also claiming damages to the tune of Rs.50,000/- as well as Rs.5,500/- as litigation charges.
2. Notice of the complaint was issued to all OPs. OP-1 has filed its written Statement whereas O.P-2 & 3 did not file any written statement and remain absent during the proceedings. O.P-1 in its written statement has pleaded that the present case has been filed with malafide intention and without any cause. The O.P has denied any manufacturing defects in the said product. It has also pleaded that the product in question has been used by the complainant for around 5 years and after that the first complaint was made. Therefore, the allegation of manufacturing defects is totally false based on concocted story. The O.P-1 has also pleaded that the said refrigerator/ fridge was sold for 5 years warranty (1 years and 4 years for compressor). The 1 years period lapsed on 07.12.2010 and 4 years compressor warranty continue till 07.12.2014. The O.P-1 has admitted that the AMC is valid till 11.06.2015 and the complaint made by complainant was attended to.
3. Complainant as well as O.P-1 has filed their evidence through affidavits and also filed documents in support of their case. The complainant has filed documents of purchase of the fridge, receipt of AMC and legal notice issued to the O.Ps. No documents other than these have been filed by the complainant. On behalf of O.P jobsheet dated 23.06.2014 whereby the technician/ engineer attended the complaint and some photographs have been filed. The O.Ps has also filed a jobsheet dated 30.12.2014.
4. We have gone through the pleadings of the parties as well as documents filed and relied upon by both the parties. The complainant in the complaint has not pleaded as to what types of problem were being faced by him after the purchase of the fridge. Admittedly the fridge was purchased on 08.12.2009 and AMC was obtained on 12.06.2014. The complainant has not filed any documents to support it case that the warranty was for 7 years. The contention of the complainant that the fridge was giving trouble from the very beginning cannot be believed in view of the facts that no documents or complaints or jobsheets have been filed by the complainant to prove its contention. On the other hand we tend to believe the version put forth by the O.P that the first complaint of the complainant was received on 23.06.2014 which was duly attended by its engineer on 02.07.2014, this is apparent for Annexure-A filed by the O.P. We have also considered Annexure-B filed by the O.P which is dated 30.12.2014 where the engineer of the company inspected the fridge and reported that the body of the fridge as melted and the said fridge is not in repairable condition. These two documents have been withheld by the complainant from the forum for the reason best known to it. The O.P have also filed certain photocopy of the photographs which are neither clear nor legible and nothing can be made out from these.
5. The present complaint was filed by the complainant on 26.09.2014 i.e. well after the 1 year period of warranty of the fridge. However, the complainant has neither pleaded nor proved any defects in the compressor. The complainant has also not proved any manufacturing defect in the fridge which was in use by him for above 5 years. The complainant has also not placed on record any expert opinion in this regard. His complaint against O.P-3 is also not tenable as his complaints were duly attended by the O.Ps.
6. In view of our observation and discussion made above, we are of the view that the complainant has failed to prove any manufacturing defects in the fridge or any deficiency in service by the O.Ps. The same is, therefore, dismissed.
Copy of the order be sent to the parties as per rules.
Announced on this 29th day of February, 2016.
(K.S. MOHI) (SUBHASH GUPTA) (SHAHINA)
President Member Member
