DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM PALAKKAD Dated this the 1st day of June 2010 .
Present : Smt. H. Seena, President : Smt. Preetha G. Nair, Member : Smt. Bhanumathi.A.K, Member
C.C.No.129/2008
M.Mohammed Moideen Malakkara House Kadavalavu Street Thathamangalam Post Palakkad -678 102. - Complainant (Adv.P.A. Jenzia ) V/s 1. The Manager M/s. Das Agencies 7/10(1) College Road, Palakkad. - 1 2. The Manager Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Company Ltd Door No.IX 1418/A4, A5 Near Infopark, Edachira Kakkanadu Cochin-682 030 (Adv R. Padmaraj & R. Aswathy)
3. The Manager A-One Trade Links Godrej Service Centre Nurani, Palakkad – 4. - Opposite parties
O R D E R By Smt. Preetha.G. Nair, Member
The complainant purchased a Godrej Refrigerator Model No.GDPV2 Unit Sr. No.80708150675 on 26/08/2007 from the dealer Das Agencies, Palakkad, the 1st opposite party. The 1st opposite party is the dealer of the 2nd opposite party the manufacturer of Godrej Electrical goods. The 3rd opposite party is the authorised service centre of the Godrej Electrical products. - 2 - Within one week of the purchase, complainant realized that the refrigerator had lot of manufacturing defects. The bulb inside the refrigerator was not working and the complainant informed the same to the 1st opposite party. The 1st opposite party asked the complainant to contact the 3rd opposite party and to get the mistake cured. Accordingly complainant contacted the 3rd opposite party and one of the servicemen of the 3rd opposite party came to the complainant's house and repaired the refrigerator. But again after one week complainant found that the thermocol inside the refrigerator filled with ants. The cooling mechanism of the refrigerator was not functioning as a result of which the vegetables, fruits and other items kept inside the refrigerator decayed emanating foul smell. The complainant informed 3rd opposite party and told them about the defects in the refrigerator. The Service men from the 3rd opposite party came to his house and verified the refrigerator. After the verification they informed that it was only a minor manufacturing defect and also informed the complainant that they have rectified the same.
After the repair made by the 3rd opposite party, the refrigerator worked satisfactorily for few days. Complainant found live ants inside the refrigerator and found that the defects earlier noted recurred. Then again the complainant called the 1st and 3rd opposite parties and informed about the defects. The 1st opposite party asked him to bring the refrigerator to their premises. Complainant took the refrigerator to the 3rd opposite party for which he had to spend an amount of Rs.1,000/- for transporting. After few days of delivery the 3rd opposite party informed the complainant that they have rectified the defects inside the refrigerator and assured that the same would function properly and asked the complainant to take back the refrigerator to his house on 30/07/2008. Accordingly complainant took the refrigerator from the 3rd opposite party and brought the same to his house. After a few days the refrigerator again started showing the same defects. Then complainant once again repeated all the formalities, but the 1st opposite party did not even responded 3rd opposite party though hesitantly informed complainant to bring the refrigerator again to their office. Complainant took the refrigerator on his own expense and delivered the same with the 3rd opposite party on 22/08/2008. The 3rd opposite party after few days informed the complainant that they have cured the manufacturing defect and asked the complainant to take back the refrigerator and complainant asked them to give - 3 - the assurance that the mistake will not occur again. The 3rd opposite party told him that since it was a manufacturing defect they cannot give assurance as to the proper performance and satisfactory functioning of the refrigerator. Hearing this complainant refused to take back the refrigerator and asked the 1st opposite party to give a brand new refrigerator having no defects. The dealer immediately turned down the request made by complainant and blatantly refused to oblige.
By manufacturing a refrigerator with lot of defects and by selling the same making assurance of its performance and quality and failure to render proper response and good service and treatment to the customer are all deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. Complainant is entitled to get a brand new refrigerator as replacement for the old defective one sold to the complainant by the 1st opposite party.
Hence the complainant prays an order directing the 1st and 2nd opposite parties to give a brand new refrigerator of the same model and capacity as replacement for the one purchased by the complainant or to return the value of the refrigerator purchased by the complainant, and directing the opposite parties to pay Rs.10,000/- as compensation for the mental agony suffered by the complainant and to pay cost of the proceedings.
2nd opposite party and 3rd opposite party filed version stating the following contentions.
2nd opposite party and 3rd opposite party admitted that the complainant had purchased a Godrej refrigerator on 26.08.2007 from the 1st opposite party. They stated that the complainant had purchased refrigerator only after demonstration and after fully satisfying with its functioning. 3rd opposite party stated that the complainant reported the first complaint after using the refrigerator more than 6 months and the technician of 3rd opposite party rectified the defects in the refrigerator immediately after reporting the same to the 1st opposite party. 2nd and 3rd opposite parties stated that it is very clear from the warranty terms that out of city limits, no transportation charges will be born by the company/service provider. On 29/07/2008, again the complainant made a complaint and
the technician repaired and delivered the refrigerator on 07/08/2008. The last complaint was reported on 22/08/2008 and the 3rd opposite party had collected the refrigerator to their service centre. After repairing the refrigerator the 3rd opposite party had delivered the refrigerator to complainant's residence on free of cost, but the complainant refused to accept the same. Opposite parties stated that the insects are entering the refrigerator because surroundings may be easily accessible to ants/other insects. 2nd opposite party stated that the say of the complainant that the cooling mechanism of the refrigerator was not functioning is false. Opposite parties stated that there is no deficiency of service and they are not liable to replace the refrigerator. Therefore 2nd and 3rd opposite parties prayed to dismiss the complaint.
Complainant filed affidavit and documents. Exhibit A1 to A5 marked on the side of complainant. Expert commissioner filed commission report and is marked as Exhibit C1. 1st opposite party was set ex-parte. 2nd opposite party filed version and affidavit. 3rd opposite party filed version, but has not filed affidavit. Matter was heard.
Issues to be considered are: 1. Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties? 2. If so, what is the relief and cost? Issues I & II We perused relevant documents on record. It is born out from Ext.A1 that the complainant had purchased a Godrej refrigerator Model No.GDPV 2 Unit Sr. No.80708150675 on 26/08/2007 from the 1st opposite party. According to Exhibit A2 the Godrej Refrigerator comes with five year warranty on compressor and one year warranty on all other parts from the date of purchase. The 3rd opposite party stated that the complainant reported the first complaint after using the refrigerator for more than 6 months and the technician of 3rd opposite party rectified the refrigerator.
Further 3rd opposite party admitted that the next complaint was reported on 29/07/2008 and the technician of 3rd opposite party came to the house of the complainant - 5 - and brought the refrigerator again to their service centre for necessary checkup and repairs. After necessary repairs the refrigerator was delivered back to the complainant on 04/08/2008. But the complainant stated that within one week of the purchase he had realized that the refrigerator had lot of manufacturing defects. No evidence was produced by the complainant for this aspect. As per Exhibit A3 series, the date of inspection is on 30/07/2008 and the reason for collection is checkup. According to Exhibit A3 series and Exhibit A4 the technician of 3rd opposite party repaired the refrigerator two times within the warranty period. The 2nd opposite party stated they are giving one year warranty for the refrigerator for the reason that if there is any manufacturing defect it will be noticeable within that long period. According to Exhibit C1 the commission report, commissioner has stated that the cooling mechanism of the refrigerator was not functioning, as a result of which vegetables, fruits and other items kept inside the refrigerator decayed and filled with ants. After verification commissioner has stated that it happened only due to the manufacturing defect of the refrigerator. 2nd and 3rd opposite party has not filed any objection to the commission report.
In view of the above discussions we are of the view that there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties. Hence the complaint allowed.
We direct the opposite parties jointly and severally liable to pay Rs.18,500/- as the value of the refrigerator and Rs.5,000/- as compensation for the mental agony suffered by the complainant and Rs.2,000/- as cost of proceedings to the complainant. Order to be complied within one month form the date of receipt of order failing which the amount shall carry interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of order till realization. Pronounced in the open court on this the 1st day of June, 2010.
PRESIDENT (SD)
MEMBER (SD)
MEMBER (SD) - 6 -
APPENDIX Date of filing: 22/11/2008 Witness examined on the side of Complainant Nil Witness examined on the side of Opposite party Nil Exhibits marked on the side of the complainant Ext. A1 – Bill dated 26/08/2007 of Das Agencies for Rs.18,500/-
2. Ext. A2 – Users guide and warranty card of Godrej refrigerator 3. Ext. A3 series- Delivery note of A-One Trade Links dated 30/07/2008, 22/08/2008 4. Ext. A4 - Delivery note of A-One Trade Links dated 30/07/2008 5. Ext. A5 - Cash receipt dated 07/08/2008 for Rs.250/- of A-One Trade Links
Exhibits marked on the side of the opposite party Nil Forums Exhibits Nil Costs Allowed Rs.2,000/- Commission report Exhibit C1 – Report dated 14/10/2009
| | HONORABLE Smt.Bhanumathi.A.K, Member | HONORABLE Smt.Seena.H, PRESIDENT | HONORABLE Smt.Preetha.G.Nair, Member | | 
