Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

CC/93/2021

T.K.M. Saikrishnan - Complainant(s)

Versus

TCL India Ltd, Rep by its Authorized Signatory and Abirami Audios & Videos Rep by its Authorized Sig - Opp.Party(s)

N.Premalatha

04 Jul 2022

ORDER

 Date of Complaint Filed :30.06.2021

 Date of Reservation     : 23.06.2022

 Date of Order              : 04.07.2022

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

CHENNAI (SOUTH), CHENNAI-3.

 

PRESENT:    TMT. B. JIJAA, M.L.,                                                 : PRESIDENT

                       THIRU. T.R. SIVAKUMHAR, B.A., B.L.,                :  MEMBER  I 

                       THIRU. S. NANDAGOPALAN., B.Sc., MBA.,        : MEMBER II

 

CONSUMER COMPLAINT No. 93/2021

MONDAY, THE 4^th DAY OF JULY 2022

Mr. T.K.M. Saikrishnan,

New No.15, 8^th Street,

Dr. Radhakrishnan Salai,

Mylapore,

Chennai – 600 004.                                                         ... Complainant               

 

..Vs..

1.TCL India Ltd,

   Rep. by its Authorised Signatory,

   TTE Technology India Private Ltd,

   A-202, Boomerang Building,

   Chandavali Farm Road,

   Andheri (E),

   Mumbai – 4000 72.

 

2.Abirami Audios & Videos,

   Rep. by its Authorised Signatory,

   New No.170, T.T.K. Road,

   Alwarpet, Chennai – 600 018.                             ….Opposite Parties

 

******

Counsel for the Complainant          :Mrs. N. Premlatha

Counsel for the Opposite Parties     :Exparte

 

        On perusal of records and after having heard the oral arguments of the Complainant, we delivered the following:

 

ORDER

Pronounced by the President Tmt. B. Jijaa, M.L.,

1.      The Complainant has filed this complaint as against the Opposite Parties under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and prays to replace the defective TV with a new one with Fresh Warranty or to refund Rs.16,990/- the price of the TV together with 12% interest from the date of purchase till the date of realization and to pay a sum of Rs.40,000/- towards mental agony, physical inconvenience and hardship caused by the unfair trade practice of the Opposite Parties and Rs.10,000/- towards cost.

2.     The averments of Complaint in brief are as follows:-

The Complainant had purchased a TCL LED TV Model No.40G 300 from Abirami Audios & Videos, the 2nd Opposite Party herein, on 17.07.2019 vide invoice No.222 for a sum of Rs.16,990/- as a gift for his Father. At the time of purchase he was informed that the said TV is covered with two year warranty. But he came to know from the Certificate of Warranty along with the Invoice that "The Warranty will be applicable for Thirty-Six (36) months from the date of Original Purchase for product LED TV. It is so unfortunate that the said TV was not functioning from 28.09.2020. He had immediately lodged a complaint under C.No IN09020083990-01. The representative of TCL visited his house on 29.09.2019 for attending the service complaint. The said representative informed the Complainant that, the LED panel is not working and promised the Complainant that, the company will replace the LED panel or the TV within 2 weeks from 29.09.2020. The Complainant has also informed the above complaint to his dealer Abirami Audios & Videos, the 2nd Opposite Party herein. The 2nd Opposite Party had also been consistently following it up with the customer care of the 1" Opposite Party and nothing was forthcoming. On 22.10.2020, he had contacted the customer service of the 1st Opposite Party and spoke to one representative named Mr.Shameer. The said representative Mr. Shameer confirmed the Complainant that, a new TV will be replaced within 30 days from 23.10.2020. When the Complainant asked him for a written confirmation by mail, he has instructed him to just refer the complaint number C.No I N 09020083990-02 for any further communication for replacement of new TV. The Complainant sent a mail dated 22.10.2020 to the 1st Opposite Party that "if they fail to replace the TV within 30 days from today and extend the warranty for another two months he may have to initiate appropriate legal remedies against the company". Since he has received neither any reply nor any positive response from the 1st Opposite Party, he sent two reminder mails dated 25.11.2020 and 29.11.2020, reiterating the defects in the TV and his grievances. Further the Complainant sent two reminder emails dated 30.11.2020 and 01.12.2020 reiterating the defects in the TV and his grievances. On 10.02.2021, at about 3 p.m, without identifying the name, somebody from Sai Service Centre calling themselves as the authorized service Centre of TCL India Ltd, addressed to the Complainant in a very rude and aggressive manner that, they cannot replace his old TV with the new TV which is completely unethical. The 1st Opposite Party's lethargic and aggressive response towards the customers cannot be taken lightly and hence forth the Complainant sent a Final Mail dated 10.02.2021 calling upon the 1st Opposite Party to compensate the losses he has incurred on purchasing the TV and the mental agony suffered during the entire period. Based on earlier complaints, no constructive remedy has been taken by the Opposite Parties which amount to sheer negligence and total disregard to the responsibility and sense of duty. Hence the complaint.

3.      The Complainant submitted his Proof Affidavit and Written Arguments. On the side of the Complainant, documents Ex.A-1 to Ex.A-8 were marked.    

4.    The Opposite Parties did not appear  before this Commission even after sufficient notice to them. Hence the Opposite Parties were set exparte .

5.     Points for Consideration

1. Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties?

2. Whether the Complainant is entitled for reliefs claimed?

3. To what other reliefs the Complainant is entitled to?

Point No.1:

Upon perusal of Ex.A-1 it is seen that on 17.07.2019 the Complainant had purchased a TCL LED TV Model No.40G 300 from the 2^nd Opposite Party, vide invoice No.222 for a sum of Rs.16,990/-.The contention of the Complainant is that the said TV was not functioning from 28.09.2020 which is well within the warranty period and hence lodged a complaint under C.No IN09020083990-01. The representative of TCL who visited his house on 29.09.2019 informed the Complainant that, the LED panel was not working and promised to replace the LED panel or the TV within 2 weeks from 29.09.2020, which fact was also informed to the 2^nd Opposite party. The Complainant had sent an e mail on 22.10.2020, Ex.A-3 to the 1^st Opposite Party to replace the TV and to extend the warranty for two months. Ex.A-4 to Ex.A-6 are the reminder mails dated 25.11.2020, 29.11.2020 and 30.11.2020 sent by the Complainant reiterating the defects in the TV and his grievances and a Final Mail dated 10.02.2021, Ex.A-7 calling upon the 1^st Opposite Party to replace new TV and to compensate the losses incurred on purchasing the TV and for the mental agony suffered. From the chat communication,Ex.A-8 between the Complainant and the 1^st Opposite Party, it is seen that the 1^st Opposite Party had agreed for replacement of the TV.

When a complaint was raised about the defect within the warranty period the Opposite Parties ought to have attended the complaint of the Complainant and rectified the defects. In spite of receipt of the complaint and E mails of the Complainant, the Opposite Parties have not chosen to rectify the defect and also had not given reply for the e mail communications sent by the Complainant, which shows the negligent attitude of the Opposite Parties. On the facts and circumstances of the present case, this Commission holds that the negligent act of the Opposite Parties by not rectifying the defects of the TV even after repeated communications by the Complainant amounts to deficiency of service, which had caused mental agony and stress to the Complainant. Hence we are of the considered view that the Opposite Parties have committed deficiency in service.

Point No.2:-

As discussed and decided in Point No.1, as against the Opposite Parties, the Complainant is entitled for replacement of a new TV of similar model or in the alternative to refund a sum of Rs.16,990/- together with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of this order, on surrender of the said TV and entitled for a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards mental agony and also to pay a sum of Rs.5000/- towards cost of the litigation.

Point No.3:-

As Point No.1 and 2 are answered in favour of the Complainant, the Complainant is not entitled for any other relief.

In the result the complaint is allowed in part. The 1^st and 2^nd Opposite Parties are jointly and severally directed to replace the defective TV with a new TV or to refund a sum of Rs.16,990/- (Rupees Sixteen Thousand Nine Hundred and Ninety Only), being the price of TV, together with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of the order, on surrender of the said TV, to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) towards mental agony, physical inconvenience and hardship caused to the Complainant along with a cost of Rs.5000/- (Rupees Five Thousand Only) to the Complainant,  within 8 weeks from the date of this order, failing which the above amounts shall carry interest at the rate of 6% p.a from the date of this order till the date of payment.

          In the result this complaint is allowed.

Dictated to Steno-Typist, transcribed and typed by her, corrected and pronounced by us in the Open Commission, on 4^th of July 2022.

 

 

S. NANDAGOPALAN                                                              T.R. SIVAKUMHAR                                                             B.JIJAA

      MEMBER II                                                                                MEMBER I                                                                PRESIDENT

 

List of documents filed on the side of the Complainant:-

 

Ex.A1	17.07.2019	Copy of Invoice
Ex.A2	17.09.2019	Copy of Certificate of Warranty
Ex.A3	22.10.2020	Email to 1" Opposite party
Ex.A4	25.11.2020	Email to 1" Opposite party
Ex.A5	29.11.2020	Email to 1" Opposite party
Ex.A6	30.11.2020 & 01.12.2020	Email to 1" Opposite party
Ex.A7	10.02.2021	Final Notice to 1" Opposite Party
Ex.A8	-	Various Chat/Message Communications

 

 

List of documents filed on the side of the Opposite Parties:-

 

NIL

 

 

 

 

 

S. NANDAGOPALAN                                                                T.R. SIVAKUMHAR                                                            B.JIJAA

        MEMBER II                                                                                MEMBER I                                                               PRESIDENT