Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

CC/91/2021

K.K. Omprakash - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Manager, Consulting Rooms Pvt., Ltd., & another - Opp.Party(s)

N. Maheswaraiah

12 Jul 2022

ORDER

                                                     Date of Complaint Filed : 06.05.2021

                                                     Date of Reservation      : 24.06.2022

                                                     Date of Order               : 12.07.2022

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.91/2021

TUESDAY, THE 12^th DAY OF JULY 2022

K.K. Omprakash,

Plot No.11, 3^rd Cross Street,

Krishna Nagar,

Chennai – 600 100.                                                   …Complainant                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   

..Vs..

1.The Manager,

   Consulting Rooms Pvt, Ltd.,

   No.202, DBS Business Centre,

   World Trade Tower,

   Barakhamba Lane,

   Connaught Place,

   New Delhi – 110001.

2.The Managing Director,

   Jeeves Consumer Services Pvt Ld.,

   No.10, Karnan Street,

   KDNTR Heritage,

   Samiyar Madam, Kodambakkam,

   Chennai – 600 024.                                               ...  Opposite Parties

******

Counsel for the Complainant            : M/s. N. Maheswaraiah

Counsel for the Opposite Parties       : Exparte

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

ORDER

Pronounced by the Member-II, Thiru.S.Nandagopalan,B.Sc., M.B.A.,

1.      The Complainant has filed this complaint as against the Opposite Party under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and prays to replace the Air Conditioner MarQ 1.5 ton 5 star spilt inverter INDUTinted Mirror ODU white with a new one with warranty or return the sale price of the A.C of Rs.39,999/- and to pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- for negligence and deficiency of service and to pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- towards compensation for mental agony and suffered by the Complainant due to the deficiency in service and to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards cost of the complaint.

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

The Complainant had purchased an Air conditioner on 10.05.2019 by name Marq by Flipkart 1.5 ton 5 star split inverter AC-IDU Tinted mirror ODU white with warranty for 1 year on product and 5 years on compressor for a sum of Rs.34,999/- through Flipkart from the 1^stOpposite Party. The service people of the opposite parties visited and installed the same. Within the warranty period the Display panel of the Air Conditioner was not working. Immediately a complaint was made to the opposite parties and the same was registered under the ticket No: OB2737812CHSCO1-1780272 followed by that 2^ndOpposite Party sent a WhatsApp message on 27.02.2020 at 11 A.M confirming the complaint registered and getting it processed, thereafter he was following with the 2^nd Opposite Party continuously, but there was no improvement. On 16.03.2020, he sent a detailed email to the 2^nd Opposite Party attaching all the WhatsApp messages stating that the complaint was still pending, but nobody turned up to address the same. After receipt of the said mail the 2^nd Opposite Party sent a reply through one Mr. Arun Prasad requested some time to get back, but there was no progress. On 08.05.2020 he again sent an email to the 1^st Opposite Party stating all the details, but till date there was no response from any of them to rectify the defect or replace the same. On the next day he got a reply from the 2^nd Opposite Party stating lame excuses, that as per the government regulations they were not supposed to operate service in his area and they were waiting for government instructions on when we can resume service. He had lodged a complaint on February 2020 itself, the lockdown imposed from 25^th March 2020. If the 2^nd Opposite Party had serviced the Air conditioner during March 2020 itself they would have avoided the lockdown period. But the 2nd Opposite Party unnecessarily dragged the same and on 09.05.2020 giving lame excuse. On 11.05.2020 the 1st Opposite Party mailed the Complainant to share the bank details to return back the sale price through NEFT. After receipt of the said email he had forwarded his bank details to the 1^st Opposite Party on the same day. But he did not receive any payment from the Opposite Party. On 11.06.2020 he sent a mail to the 2^nd Opposite Party to know the status of his complaint. But there was no response. On 10.09.2020, he sent a mail to the opposite parties, instructing them to service his Air condition since the lockdown period was completed. But the opposite parties failed to attend the service. Added to this, he received a mail from the 1^st Opposite Party on 18.09.2020, wherein it was stated that since warranty period had expired, they were unable to process his request. After receipt of the said mail he sent a reply through mail on 21.10.2020 right from the lodging of complaint on 27.02.2020 and the product was well within the warranty period and there was no lockdown period at that time. The opposite parties negligently ignored the complaint even though he was continuously following. Though the opposite parties were able to send numerous apologies though their replies but failed to comply with the request of the Complainant. The apologies from the opposite parties without servicing will amount to unfair trade practice. Thereafter he received a mail from the 2^nd Opposite Party on 22.10.2020 providing a mail address for extension of warranty period, when he need not to approach for extension of warranty for no fault on his side. Without repairing or replace the defective Air Condition within the warranty period they dragged time to avoid the service. The act of ignoring the complaint and replying with lame excuses is negligence under the consumer protection Act and also it amounts to clear deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties and liable to compensation for the same. Hence the Complaint.

3.     The Complainant had filed his Proof Affidavit and Written Arguments. On the side of the Complainant documents marked as Exs.A-1 to Exs.A-19. The Opposite Parties served with sufficient notice and they have been called absent and said Ex-parte.

4.Points for Consideration:-

1. Whether there is unfair trade practice as well as deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties?

2. Whether the Complainant is entitled for reliefs claimed?

3. Whether the Complainant is entitled for any other relief/s?

Point No.1:-

It is an undisputed fact that the Complainant had purchased an Air conditioner vide Model by name Marq by Flipkart 1.5 ton 5 star split inverter AC with warranty for 1 year on product and 5 years on compressor for a sum of Rs.34,999/- from the 1^st Opposite Party on 10.05.2019, as evident from Ex.A-1, being the Tax Invoice. As Display panel found to be not working during the warranty period, the Complainant lodged a complaint on 27.02.2020 with the 2^nd Opposite Party, vide ticket No.OB27-37812CHSCO1-1780272 confirming the same via Whatsapp 2^nd Opposite Party registered the Complaint as found in EX.A-2. In spite of constant followup made by the Complainant, the 2^nd Opposite Party instead of attending the Service, sent whatsapp messages stating their service person would call and fix an appointment and sent links to re-schedule his services on 28.02.2020, 03.03.2020 and on 14.03.2020 as found in Ex.A-3, EX.A-4 and EX.A-5. By EX.A-6 being an Email dated 16.03.2020 sent to the 2^nd Opposite Party attaching all the Whatsapp messages duly confirming that his Complaint was still pending. As there was no response from the 2^nd Opposite Party, an email dated 08.05.2020 was sent to the 1^st Opposite Party and marking a copy to the 2^ndOpposite Party, wherein it was stated that when a reminder mail dated 05.05.2020 to the 2^nd Opposite Party, and it was instructed by them to forward the mail and asked to contact Marq customer care, when contacted it was informed that his previous complaint was closed, when the same was kept open by the 2^nd Opposite Party and when his problem was not rectified, how could the complaint was closed and his complaint was registered again, as found in EX.A-7. On 09.05.2020 the 2^nd  Opposite Party replied that they were unable to operate the Complainant area due to Government restrictions as found in EX.A-8. As per EX.A-9,On 11.05.2020 the 1st Opposite Party sought apology and mentioned that a mail was sent to his registered email id st Opposite Party it is found that the Complainant wants his issue to be rectified and had denied the registered mail id mentioned in Ex.A-10, as his registered mail id was nd Opposite Party to know the status of his complaint as the same was not resolved. On release of the Lock down, the Complainant had sent an email dated 10.09.2020 as  his problem was not resolved since March, 2020, as found in Ex.A12. He had received a mail dated 18.09.2020 from the 1^st Opposite Party wherein it was mentioned that as per the Invoice date the warranty has been expired and they were unable to process his request, as found in EX.A-13. Thereafter the Complainant had sent a mail dated 21.10.2020 to the 1^st and 2^nd Opposite Parties stating if the issue is not rectified he would register a case, as found in Ex.A-14, for which he had received a reply mail dated 21.10.2020 from the 2^nd Opposite Party wherein it was mentioned that on checking about his claim status, as he had responded the past few days so the claims was cancelled and advised to extend warranty. And even the 1^st Opposite Party by their mail dated 22.10.2020 had informed that they could not do service to the Complainant for free of cost and only during the warranty period they could service free of cost, as found in Ex.A-17. A reply email dated 22.10.2020 as per Ex.17 was sent to the 2^nd Opposite Party mentioning that they had provided service in stipulated time and blamed him as he had not responded. The Complainant issued a legal notice dated 08.02.2021 to the Opposite Parties, which was marked as Ex.A-18 claiming replacement of a New Air Condition and compensation for negligence, deficiency of service, mental agony, which was received by the 2^nd Opposite Party and the same was marked as Ex.A-19, but the 1^st Opposite Party returned the legal notice.

On considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Commission holds that the Opposite Parties by not providing service during the Warranty period showing Covid Lock Down as a reason, though the Complaint was lodged as early on 27.02.2020 which was well before the Covid Lock down and when the Complainant had shown much interest to get the problem resolved by the Opposite Parties, had provided an opportunity to the Opposite Parties when the lock down was released to attend the service and to rectify his problem, the Opposite Parties had failed and neglected to comply the request of the Complainant by mentioning the warranty period was over and had advised the Complainant to extend the warranty period, clearly amounts to unfair trade practice and deficiency of service on the part of the Opposite Parties. Hence, this Commission is of the considered view that the Opposite Parties had committed Unfair trade practice and deficiency of service, which caused serious mental agony and sufferance to the Complainant Accordingly, Point No.1 is answered in favour of the Complainant.  

Point No.2 and 3 :-

As discussed and decided Point No.1, the opposite parties 1 and 2 shall pay a sum of Rs.34,999/- (as per Tax invoice Ex.A-1). But wrongly mentioned as Rs.39,999/- with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from 27/02/2020 till the date of this order. Further the opposite parties shall pay a sum of Rs.25,000/- towards compensation for deficiency in service and for the mental agony caused to the Complainant along with the cost of Rs.5000/-. Accordingly, point Nos 2 & 3 are answered.

In the result this complaint is allowed in part. The Opposite parties 1 and 2 are jointly and severally directed to refund a sum of Rs.34,999/-(Rupees Thirty Four Thousand Nine Hundred and Ninety Nine Only) being the sale price of Air Condition Marq by Flipkart 1.5 ton 5 star split inverter AC-IDU Tinted mirror ODU white  with interest @ 6% per annum from 27.02.2020 till the date of this order and to pay a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) towards compensation for deficiency in service and also for the mental agony caused to the Complainant along with the cost of Rs.5000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only) towards litigation expenses, within 8 weeks from the date of this order, failing which the Complainant is entitled to recover the above amounts along with interest @9% per annum from the date of this order to till the date of realisation.

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 12^th day 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:-

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

NIL

S. NANDAGOPALAN             T.R. SIVAKUMHAR                   B.JIJAA

         MEMBER II                     MEMBER I                       PRESIDENT