District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission ,Faridabad.
Consumer Complaint No.470/2019.
Date of Institution: 26.09.2019.
Date of Order: 17.01.2023.
Shashi Kant aged about 34 years son of Shri Tara Chand R/o Village Bhatola, Near BSNL Tower, Post Office Badoli, Tehsil & Distt. Faridabad, Aadhar No. 9396 0834 4955.
…….Complainant……..
Versus
1. Shyam Authorized Person –cum-Sales Manager, Vijay Sales, Crown Plaza, 29th Mile Stone, Sector-15A, Faridabad- 121007.
2. M/s. Videocon Industries Limited, Corporate Office: Fort House, 2nd floor, 221, DR. DN Road, Fort, Mumbai – 400 001.
IInd address:
M/s.. Videocon Industries Limited, Videocon Tower, Block E-3, Jhandewalan Extension, New Delhi – 110 005.
IIIrd Address
M/s. Videocon Industries Limited, West Delhi Address, Penguie Care-L-2/114, New Mahavir Nagar, Outer Ring road, Vikaspuri, New Delhi – 110 018.
…Opposite parties……
Complaint under section-12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986
Now amended Section 34 of Consumer protection Act 2019.
BEFORE: Amit Arora……………..President
Mukesh Sharma…………Member.
Indira Bhadana………….Member.
PRESENT: Sh. P.K.Bhuradia , counsel for the complainant.
Opposite party No.1 ex-parte vide order dated 21.12.2022.
Opposite party No.2 ex-parte vide order dated 30.08.2022.
ORDER:
The facts in brief of the complaint are that the complainant had purchased a washing machine make Videocon vide receipt/order NO. 342-Q-SO-2431 dated 26.12.2017 Code NO. 342170016095 and payment was made a sum of Rs.12,000/- alongwith GST & IGS tax. The delivery of aforesaid washing machine was received by the complainant on 29.12.2017 and after delivery the complainant used to said washing machine but it was not properly functioned from the inception. In this regard, the complainant made various complaints to the customer of Videocon Company time and again but no fruitful result came and the complainant had been harassed and humiliate by facing difficulties for that the opposite party company supplier and distributor were responsible for the lapse as per term of invoice. In the month July 2019 a telephonic call was received from the opposite party and facts were narrated to the complainant. It was pointed out that the washing machine of the opposite party company did not perform work of clothing properly and caused mental agony alongwith loss of money and created the loss and difficulties to perform the same. The manufacturer, distributor, suppier were jointly and severally liable for compensation and duty bound to change its part of Videocon washing machine. Since guarantee period of Videocon machine was valid till 28.12.2019 and hence the said opposite party supplier and distributor were bound to rectify the washing machine properly. There was a interior defects in the washing machine from the date of dispatch and cause loss to the complainant by purchasing the defective washing machine. The complainant sent legal notice dated 25.08.2019 to the opposite party but all in vain. The aforesaid act of opposite parties amounts to deficiency of service and hence the complaint. The complainant has prayed for directions to the opposite parties to:
a) replace the said washing machine with new one of same model and company in properly running condition or to direct the opposite party to pay costs of aforesaid washing machine as compensation besides costs in the interest of justice.
b) pay Rs. 10,000/- as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment .
c) pay litigation expenses to the complainant.
2. Opposite party No.1 put in appearance through counsel and filed written statement wherein Opposite party No.1 refuted claim of the complainant and submitted that opposite party NO.1 was only a dealer/company agent. If the complaint was received from the consumer then every dealer informed the manufacturing company and service centre and he had written to check and remove the defect. Accordingly, opposite party No.1 sent the complaint to the service centre which was received from the complainant. It was submitted that the complainant pressurized the answering opposite party No.1 to replace the same. Opposite party No. 1 denied rest of the allegations leveled in the complaint and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
3. Notice issued to opposite party No.2 on 26.7.2022 not received back either served or unserved. Case called several times since morning but none appeared on behalf of opposite party No.2. Hence, opposite party No.2 was hereby proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 30.08.2022.
4. The complainant led evidence in support of his respective version.
5. Case called several times since morning but none appeared on behalf of opposite party No.1. Therefore, opposite party No.1 was proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 2`1.12.2022.
6. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record on the file.
7. In this case the complaint was filed by the complainant against opposite parties– Shyam Authorized person & others with the prayer to: a) replace the said washing machine with new one of same model and company in properly running condition or to direct the opposite party to pay costs of aforesaid washing machine as compensation besides costs in the interest of justice. b) pay Rs. 10,000/- as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment . c) pay litigation expenses to the complainant.
To establish his case the complainant has led in his evidence, Ex.CW1/A – affidavit of Shashi Kant,, legal notice, bill,, postal receipt, Aadhar card.
8. There is nothing on record to disbelieve and discredit the aforesaid ex-parte evidence of the complainant. Since opposite parties Nos1 & 2 have not come present to contest the claim of the complainant, therefore, the allegations made in complaint by the complainant go unrebutted. From the aforesaid ex-parte evidence it is amply proved that opposite parties Nos.1 & 2 have rendered deficient services to the complainant. Hence the complaint is allowed against opposite parties Nos.1 & 2
9. Opposite parties Nos.1 & 2 jointly & severally, are directed to replace the washing machine in question with the same model to the complainant. Opposite parties Nos.1 & 2 are also directed to pay Rs.2200/- as compensation for causing mental agony & harassment alognwith Rs.2200/- as litigation expenses to the complainant. The complainant is also directed to hand over the old washing machine in question to the opposite parties after receipt of the copy of the order. Compliance of this order be made within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. File be consigned to the record room.
Announced on: 17.01.2023 (Amit Arora)
President
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Faridabad.
(Mukesh Sharma)
Member
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Faridabad.
(Indira Bhadana)
Member
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Faridabad.
