Kerala

Thiruvananthapuram

CC/12/40

Tharish - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Manager, M/S L G Electronics - Opp.Party(s)

11 May 2023

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION VAZHUTHACADU THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

PRESENT

               SRI.P.V.JAYARAJAN           : PRESIDENT

          SMT.PREETHA G NAIR     : MEMBER

           SRI.VIJU.V.R                       : MEMBER

CC.NO.40/2012 (Filed on :  30/01/2012 )

ORDER DATED : 11/05/2023

COMPLAINANT

Tharish,

AKM Building, Alamcode,

Thiruvananthapuram -1

(By Adv.C.S.Raj mohan)

                                                   VS

OPPOSITE PARTIES

1. The Manager,

M/s.LG Electronics India Pvt Ltd,

          Plot No.51, Surajpur Kasna Road,

          Greaternoida, 201306 (UP), India,

           (OP1 by Adv.R.Padmaraj)

2. The Manager,

United Electronics, Ayurveda College,

Prashanthi, Mansion, TC.25/23693,

•  

(Exparte)

ORDER

SRI.VIJU.V.R                 : MEMBER

1.       The complainant has presented this complaint before this Commission under section 12 of the Consumer Protection 1986. The brief facts of the case is that the complainant purchased a LG one Ton Split Air conditioner for an amount of Rs.13,000/- (Rupees thirteen thousand only) and stabilizer for Rs.2000/- (Rupees two thousand only) on 17/02/2011 from the second opposite party. The second opposite party’s technician installed the air conditioner. But from the next day of installation of air conditioner itself it was not working and it was duly informed to the second opposite party. The opposite party’s technician inspected the air conditioner and informed the complainant that air conditioner has got some manufacturing defects and cannot be rectified. The second opposite party assured that after informing the first opposite party the air conditioner can be replaced with a defect free one. But the opposite parties 1 & 2 never replaced the air conditioner. The complainant send legal notice to the opposite parties 1 & 2, but there was no reply from the side of the opposite parties 1 & 2. The act of the opposite parties amounts to deficiency in service, hence this complaint.

 2.      Even though the opposite parties 1 & 2 received notice from this commission, the second opposite party did not appeared before this commission. Hence second opposite party was set exparte.

3.    The first opposite party filed version. It is admitted by the first opposite party that the complainant purchased a LG Air conditioner by paying an amount of Rs.13,000/-(Rupees thirteen thousand only) on 17/02/2011 from the second opposite party who is a retail dealer. It is contended by the first opposite party that the defect of the air conditioner was due to the improper installation by the technician of the second opposite party. The installation of the air conditioner was not done by the authorized service personnel. No complaint is registered by the complainant either in the Toll free number provided in the user manual or with the authorized service center. The second opposite party never informed the first opposite party regarding such complaint or any proposal for replacement. The first opposite party is not aware of any legal notice send by the complainant. It is admitted by the first opposite party that their Area Service Manager has offered to rectify any defect caused to the air conditioner. Unfortunately, after that the said Area Manager got transferred and who by an inadvertent omission failed to inform his successor. The first opposite party has admitted that as a gesture of good will they are prepared to refund the cost of the air conditioner on condition that the complainant shall return the air conditioner to the first opposite party. There is no deficiency in service from the side of the first opposite party, hence complaint may be dismissed.

4.Issues to be ascertained:

i. Whether there is any unfair trade practice from the side of opposite parties    1 & 2 ?

ii. Whether the complainant is entitled to get the reliefs?

5..Issues (i) & (ii):-

Both these issues are considered together for the sake of convenience. The complainant has filed affidavit and has produced four documents which were marked as Exts.A1 to A4. The first opposite party has submitted that they have no oral evidence. The complainant and first opposite party has filed argument notes. Even though the complainant paid batta to the expert commissioner, the commissioner has not filed report before this commission. This commission has sent notice to the expert commissioner. He does not appeared before this commission and not filed report. On going through Ext.A1 it can be seen that the complainant has purchased an air conditioner from the second opposite party. It is denied by the first opposite party that they have not received any legal notice from the complainant cannot be accepted as it can be seen from Ext.A4 that they have received the legal notice from the complainant.  So it is clear that the first opposite party has got the knowledge of grievance of the complainant. It is admitted by the first opposite party in their version that they have ready to refund the amount of air conditioner to the complainant on condition that the complainant shall return the air conditioner. The complainant has purchased an air conditioner in the year 2011. Now almost 12 years has been elapsed, so it is not possible to return the air conditioner to the first opposite party. After knowing the grievance of the complainant through Ext.A4 the first opposite party has not done anything to resolve the grievance occurred to the complainant. The second opposite party being a dealer is also responsible to resolve the grievance occurred to the complainant, hence the act of the opposite parties 1 & 2 amounts to deficiency in service.

           In the result, the complaint is allowed. The opposite parties 1 & 2 are  jointly and severally liable to pay an amount of Rs.13,000/- (Rupees thirteen thousand only) to the complainant and pay Rs.5000/- (Rupees five thousand only) as compensation and pay cost of Rs.2500/- (Rupees two thousand and five hundred only) towards the cost of the proceedings within one month from the date of receipt of this order failing which the amount except cost carries interest @ 9 % per annum from the date of default till realization.

                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 Commission, this the 11^th day of May 2023.

 

                                                                                 Sd/-

P.V.JAYARAJAN   : PRESIDENT

 

                                                                                           Sd/-

  PREETHA .G.NAIR: MEMBER

 

                                                                                               Sd/- 

VIJU.V.R     : MEMBER

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Be/

 

 

APPENDIX

CC.NO.40/2012

List of witness for the complainant

PW1                      - Tharish

List of Exhibits for the complainant

Ext.A1                  - Copy of retail invoice dated 17/02/2011 for Rs.13,000/-

Ext.A2                  - Copy of retail invoice dated 17/02/2011 for Rs.2000/-

Ext.A3                  - Copy of legal notice

Ext.A4                  - copy of acknowledgement

List of witness for the opposite parties – NIL

List of Exhibits for the opposite parties – NIL

Court Exhibits                                     -NIL

                                                                                                        Sd/-

PRESIDENT