BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER REDRESSAL FORUM

(DISTRICT FORUM)

NORTH TRIPURA:  KAILASHAHAR.

                                    C A S E   NO. C.C. 12 of 2014

SHRI BISWABANDHU SEN

Joy Hind Road,

PO – Dharmanagar

District – North Tripura

                                                  …. COMPLAINANT  

                                  V E R S U S

1. The Chief Executive Officer,

Samsung India Electronics Private Limited

A-25, Ground Floor, Front Tower,

Mohan Co-operative Industrial Estates Suites,

New Delhi, Pin – 110044

2. Kiran Enteprise

Nayapara, Dharmanagar,

District – North Tripura

                                ……….. OPPOSITE PARTIES 

            P R E S E N T

                                   SHRI D. M. JAMATIA

                                          PRESIDENT

                                      DISTRICT FORUM

                            NORTH TRIPURA: KAILASHAHAR

          A N D

                           Shri Manish Chandra Saha,  Member

                                    Smti. , S. Deb, Member

                                          C O U N S E L

         For the complainant  :Complainant himself conducted the case

         For the Opposite Party No.1 :  Heard Ex parte

         For the opposite party No.2  : Shri S. Deb Roy, Advocate

   JUDGMENT DELIVERED ON THE 19^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2016

         J  U D G M E N T

This complaint has been preferred by Shri Biswabandhu Sen under section 12(1) of the Consumer’s Protection Act, 1986 for repairing of his freeze purchased from the company, Samsung India Private Limited or alternatively, to replace the defective freeze.

2.       The case of the complainant, as it appears from the complaint, is that the complainant purchased one Samsung Freeze RF67DEPN/XTL under model No. YAJ64ADC100064 from one shop, namely, Kiran Enterprise, Nayapara, Dharmanagar, North Tripura, hereinafter referred to as OP No. 2, for a consideration money of Rs. 82,000/- on 28^th May, 2012, but after about one year from the date of purchase, the freeze was found disturbing. On request, the OP No. 2 arranged repairing of the freeze in the year 2013, but, thereafter, when the freeze again went on disturbing, the OP No. 2 did not respond to the request of the complainant and since then, the freeze is lying idle without any service. It is to be mentioned here that as per procedure, the complainant contacted the company located at Bangalore for 5/6 times, but no response was receied. Thereafter, under compulsion, the complainant served the Head Office of the Company located at New Delhi with a notice on 01-08-2014, but even then the complaint of the complainant was not addressed, which ultimately culminated to the present complaint lodged by the complainant before this Forum to get proper justice.

3.       Notice was duly served upon the Chief Executive Officer, Samsung India Electronics Private Limited, A-25, Ground Floor, Front Tower, Mohan Co-operative Industrial Estates Suites, New Delhi, Pin – 110044, hereinafter referred to as OP No.1 and on consultation of the record it is found that the OP No. 1 received the notice on 30-03-2013, but did not appear to contest the case. Hence, it was ordered vide Order dated 02-04-2015 that the case would proceed and be decided ex parte against the OP No.1.

4.       On receiving notice, OP No. 2, appeared and submitted written objection. It is stated by the OP NO. 2 in its written objection that the complainant purchased the refrigerator of Samsung Brand from the OP No.2 while the OP No. 2 used to deal in as Distributor/Dealer of Samsung. It is mentioned that at the relevant time the OP No. 2 was concerned with the sales only. Servicing was done by the service centre of the company located at Guwahati. When the refrigerator started disturbance and OP No. 2 was informed about the troubles of the refrigerator by the complainant, OP No. 2 informed the complainant that it was no longer the authorized Distributor/Dealer of Samsung and provided the complainant with the address and telephone numbers of the Service Centre of the company situated at Guwahati. Since the OP No. 2 is not the authorized Distributor/Dealer of Samsung India Electronics Private Limited, it can not render any service to the complainant in respect of repairing and finally prayed to dismiss the complaint lodged against it.

4.       The complainant submitted his examination in chief on affidavit and on oath exhibited the following documents:-

1.      Letter written by the complainant addressed to the OP No. 1, marked as Ext. 1
2.      Cash memo of Rs. 82,000/- towards purchase of the freeze from the OP No.2, marked as Ext. 2.

5.       OP No. 2 did neither adduce any evidence nor produce any documents in support of its case.

6.       Now, the only point to be determined in this case is as to whether there is gross deficiency on the part of the OPs and what relief/reliefs the complainant is entitled to?

F I N D I N G S & D E C I S I O N

7.       The complainant at the time of examination in chief and cross-examination submitted certain documents, which were exhibited. From the Ext. 2, Cash Memo, it is apparent that the complainant purchased one Samsung Brand freeze RF67DEPN/XTL under model No. YAJ64ADC100064 from the shop, namely, Kiran Enterprise, Nayapara, Dharmanagar, North Tripura on 28-05-2012, but unfortunately the said freeze started developing some problems. Water used to be collected in the water chamber, but the logged water could not be channeled out mechanically and the stored water had to be driven out manually. Besides this, the freeze was also found making sound continuously, some days even for round the clock. Complainant informed the matter vide complaint No. 8446053880 on 16-07-2014 to the Company, but no step was taken by the company to cure the said defects of the freeze of the company. Then the complainant again ventilated his grievance on 18-07-2014 and 19-07-2014, but even then the OP No.2 paid no heed to the complaint of the complainant. The complainant also made telephonic conversation with the Repairing centre of the Company several times, but all his efforts ended in smoke. Ultimately, the complainant had to stop the use of freeze and was compelled to knock the door of this Forum to get appropriate relief. The complainant, however, in his evidence stated that he would be satisfied if the freeze purchased by him is repaired on the cost of the company or the freeze is replaced by a new one.

8.       It is found from the record that the OP No. 2 is not an authorized distributor/dealer of the Company and OP No. 2 has no liability in respect of repairing of the freeze of the complainant. It is the company, whose responsibility is to repair the troubles of the freeze that developed after one year of the purchase. Samsung is a highly reputed company dealing in electronics items throughout India, but in the instant case the Samsung Company is found to be very much apathetic in giving post purchase service to a genuine consumer. The complainant is a genuine consumer and he is a standing M.L.A of Dharmanagar town. It is found from the record that the complainant sent emails, call logs etc. and even made telephonic conversation with the men of the Company informing the troubles developed by the freeze, but all his efforts turned futile and he had to stop the use of his freeze ultimately. The very purpose of purchasing the freeze has been proved to be fruitless. The freeze of the complainant is a costly one, Rs. 82,000/-, but only because of indifferent attitude of the company, the complainant could not get service from his costly freeze. There is no lacking on the part of the complainant to get his freeze repaired by the company, but the company has been proved to be deficient in service. It is not at all expected from a big and branded Company like Samsung India Electronics Private Limited to behave with the consumers in such a lackadaisical manner. As such, we find that it is the responsibility of the Company to repair the freeze of the complainant at its cost or to replace the same with a new one having same model and cost and if this is done, this will meet the ends of justice.

9.       Accordingly, the point is decided and the petition filed by the complainant praying for getting justice is allowed.

10.     In the result, OP No.1, the Chief Executive Officer, Samsung India Electronics Private Limited, A-25, Ground Floor, Front Tower, Mohan Co-operative Industrial Estates Suites, New Delhi, Pin – 110044 is hereby directed to repair the refrigerator, RF67DEPN/XTL under model No. YAJ64ADC100064 by removing all emergent problems of the freeze at its own cost or replace the same with a new one having same model and cost, within 2(two) months from today, the 19^th day of February, 2016, failing which the complainant will be at liberty to take appropriate step against the O.P. No.1. Since the complainant has not prayed for any compensation against the OP No.1, no compensation is granted against the said O.P. by this Forum.

11.     Furnish a copy of this judgment to the complainant free of cost. Send a copy of this judgment to the OP No. 1 at its address through registered post with A/D for immediate compliance. The complainant, however, has to bear the cost of the postage.

12.     The case stands disposed of on contest.

                                   ANNOUNCED

                                                                                   (D.M.Jamatia)

        I agree                   I agree                                     PRESIDENT

(Manish Ch. Saha)     (Smti. S. Deb)        

        MEMBER              MEMBER