BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES

REDRESSAL COMMISSION

VAZHUTHACAUD : THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

PRESENT

C.C.No.382/2019    Filed on 29.10.2019

ORDER DATED: 18.03.2021

Complainant:

(by Adv. C.M. Pradeepkumar)

Opposite parties:

ORDER

SRI. P.V. JAYARAJAN,  PRESIDENT:

1. This is a complaint filed under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act 1986. 
2. The complainant’s case is that he has purchased a refrigerator from M/s.Nandilath G-Mart, Kesavadasapuram on 20.01.2016 for an amount of Rs.31,600/-.  Subsequently, some defect was found in the main door handle of the refrigerator and hence complainant contacted the 2^nd opposite party M/s Godrej Appliances and the 2^nd opposite party deputed 1^st opposite party to replace and repair the said defects.  For the said repair and replacement of handle complainant paid Rs.725/-.  The complainant further submitted that the executive of the 2^nd opposite party canvassed him and advised to take warranty protection plan and accordingly the complainant took the warranty protection plan for which the complainant paid Rs.7,945/- on 24.11.2017 to the 2^nd opposite party.  Accordingly the 2^nd opposite party issued a warranty protection plan for the period from 24.11.2017 to 23.11.2025.  At the time of issuing warranty protection plan the 2^nd opposite party assured that the replacement of the parts during warranty protection plan period will be without any cost.  The complainant’s case is that the opposite party collected the amount from the complainant during warranty protection plan period and the same amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite parties and approached this commission for redressing his grievances.
3. When the case came up for further proceedings today (18.03.2021) the complainant filed a memo stating that the dispute between the complainant and the opposite parties were amicably resolved and the complainant acknowledged the receipt of Rs.9,177/-(Rupees Nine Thousand One Hundred and Seventy Seven only) from the opposite party towards refund of the amount collected by the opposite parties during the warranty protection plan period from the complainant.  The complainant further stated that he is not willing to further proceed with the complaint as he has got no grievances against the opposite parties.  The complainant further expressed his willingness to not press the complaint.
4. In the result the complaint is dismissed as not pressed.  No order as to cost.

A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties free of charge and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room.

Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Court, this the 18^th day of March, 2021.

SL