Per Sri A. Hazarath Rao,  President:-

        The complainant filed this complaint u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act seeking compensation of Rs.11,800/- (value of washing machine); Rs.25,000/- as damages towards mental agony and Rs.130/- towards court fee.

2.   In brief the averments of the complaint are these:

        The complainant purchased the washing machine AW 16-8061 IFB (fully warranted machine) from the 1^st opposite party on                  25-10-10 with a warranty of two years.   Mechanic of the 1^st opposite party came and rectified the trouble under warranty when the said washing machine gave trouble.    Since 4 months prior to 13-04-12 the said washing machine is not working properly and is giving trouble.   Inspite of requests the 1^st opposite party failed to repair though covered under warranty.   The complainant gave a notice through consumer development committee, Guntur on 18-03-12 to take back the washing machine and replace a new one or return Rs.11,800/- together with interest @24% p.a.   The 2^nd opposite party is manufacturer of the said washing machine.  The opposite parties thus committed deficiency of service in not attending to the repairs of the washing machine.  The complainant is therefore entitled to claim Rs.25,000/- as damages towards mental agony.   The complaint therefore be allowed.  

3.   The 2^nd opposite party filed memo adopting the version of the 2^nd opposite party and their contention in brief is thus:

        The 1^st opposite party is only a seller of goods manufactured by the 2^nd opposite party.  The 1^st opposite party informed the complainant to contact the toll free numbers mentioned therein in case of any complaint.  On receiving the complaint under toll free number the concerned of the 2^nd opposite party will attend to the problems.   The 1^st opposite party has no role in the complaint if any of customer relating to a product.   The opposite parties are not aware of the Consumer Development Committee and no person approached them.  The complainant did not explain the alleged defect properly when mechanic attended to his house.  The complainant informed that he is using the inferior quality detergent.  The complainant is at liberty to produce the said washing machine for verification.   The said washing machine did not suffer from any defect.   The opposite parties did not commit any deficiency of service.  The complaint therefore be dismissed.

4.  Exs.A-1 to A-3 were marked on behalf of complainant.                  No documents were marked on behalf of opposite parties.

5.     Now the points that arose for consideration are:

1. Whether the opposite parties committed deficiency of service?
2. Whether the complainant is entitled to compensation and if so to what amount?
3. To what relief?

6.   Admitted facts in this case are:

1. The complainant purchased washing machine AW60-8061 for Rs.11,800/- on 25-10-10 (Ex.A-1).
2. The machine purchased under Ex.A-1 carried warranty for a period of two years (Ex.A-2).
3. The 2^nd opposite party is the manufacturer of the machine covered by Ex.A-1.
4. On one occasion mechanic of the opposite parties visited the complainant’s house and repaired it.

7. POINT No.1:-   Ex.A-2 warranty amounts to a contract between the complainant and the opposite parties.  The relevant portion in Ex.A-2 is extracted below for better appreciation:

       “IFB Industries Limited (The company) warrants to the original domestic purchaser of this washing machine (Appliance) that it is free from defects in workmanship and materials.  During 24 months from the date of purchase of the new washing machine all the parts  of the washing machine which prove to be defective in workmanship and/or materials shall be replaced or repaired free of charge on intimation to the company/company’s authorized service centre nearest to the place where the appliance is installed.  This warranty is subject to limitations of warranty”. 

8.   The complainant sent Ex.A-3 notice under registered post on   19-03-12 to the 1^st opposite party.  The 1^st opposite party is none other than the agent of the 2^nd opposite party as rightly contended by the complainant.   The contention of the opposite parties that the complainant used inferior quality of detergent cannot be accepted in the absence of any cogent evidence.  It is not the case of the opposite party that they attended to the complaint of the said washing machine after receipt of the Ex.A-3 notice.  The opposite parties did not aver anything regarding Ex.A-3 notice sent to the            1^st opposite party.  In the absence of any averments contra it has to be inferred that the 1^st opposite party received Ex.A-3 notice sent under registered post.  The complainant filed this case on 03-04-12 i.e., within 15 days after issuing notice.  Not attending to the repairs without though brought to the notice of the opposite parties  amounted to deficiency of service in our considered opinion.  We therefore hold that the opposite parties committed deficiency of service in not attending to the complainant’s grievance.

9.  POINT No.2:-   The complainant claimed Rs.25,000/- as damages towards mental agony.   The complainant simply mentioned that the opposite parties are liable to pay Rs.25,000/- being the loss caused by the opposite parties towards compensation, mental agony and damages.  The complainant used the machine from the date of purchase i.e., from 25-10-10 upto November, 2011 i.e., for a period of one year as seen from Ex.A-3 notice.    Any compensation claimed and to be awarded must commensurate with the injury complained off.  Under those circumstances, awarding Rs.2,000/- towards damages will meet ends of justice.  We therefore answer this point in favour of complainant.

10.  POINT No.3:-   In view of above findings, the complaint is partly allowed as indicated below:

1. The opposite parties are directed to repair the washing machine covered under Ex.A-1 within four weeks or replace it if repair is not possible.
2. The opposite parties in the alternative are directed to pay Rs.11,800/- (Rupees Eleven thousand eight hundred only) in case of their failure either to rectify or replace the said washing machine within the above said period within two weeks thereafter failing which it carries interest @9% p.a., from the date of order till realization.  
3. The opposite parties are directed to pay Rs.2,000/- (Rupees two thousand only) towards compensation.
4. The opposite parties are directed to pay Rs.1,000/- (Rupees one thousand only) towards costs.
5. The clauses 3 and 4 of the above order shall be complied within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the order.

            Typed to my dictation by Junior Steno, corrected by me and pronounced in the open Forum dated this the 27^th day of August, 2012.

          MEMBER                                                             PRESIDENT

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

DOCUMENTS MARKED

For Complainant:

For opposite parties:    NIL  

                                                                             PRESIDENT