Tamil Nadu

North Chennai

CC/69/2018

R.Balaji - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Manager Philips India Limited - Opp.Party(s)

M/s.R.Vetrivel

19 Feb 2019

ORDER

 

                                                            Complaint presented on:  14.05.2018

                                                                Order pronounced on:  19.02.2019

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (NORTH)

2^nd Floor, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C.Nagar, Park Town, Chennai-3

 

PRESENT:  TMT.K.LAKSHMIKANTHAM, B.Sc., B.L., DTL.,DCL, DL & AL -  PRESIDENT

 

TMT.P.V.JEYANTHI B.A., MEMBER - I

 

TUESDAY  THE 19^th  DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019

 

C.C.NO.69/2018

 

R.Balaji,

Residing at No.13/1,

Narayana Maistry 1^st Street,

Villivakkam,

Chennai – 600 049.

                                                                                        ….. Complainant

 

 ..Vs..

1.The Manager,

Philips India Limited,

9^th Floor, DLF 9-B,

DLF Cyber City, Sector 25,

DLF Phase – 3,

Gurgaon – 122 002. India.

 

2.M/s. Santhosh & Company,

No.61A, M.T.H.Road,

Villivakkam,

Chennai – 600 049.

 

3.The Manager,

New Tech Services,

Authorised Service Center,

No.19, Plot No.323, West Avenue,

M.K.B.Nagar,Vyasarpadi,

Chennai – 600 039.

.....Opposite Parties

Date of complaint                                 : 30.07.2018

Counsel for Complainant                      : M/s.Vetrivel, A.Tamizhvanan

 

Counsel for Opposite Parties                   : Ex – parte (24.09.2018)

 

 

O R D E R

 

BY PRESIDENT TMT.K.LAKSHMIKANTHAM, B.Sc., B.L., DTL.,DCL, DL & AL

          This complaint is filed by the complainant u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.1986.

1.THE COMPLAINT IN BRIEF:

          The complainant has purchased the PHILIPS TV 55” under an Invoice bearing No.1928 cash bill dated 14.10.2015 raised by the 2^nd opposite party for a sum of Rs.67,000/-. Ever since the purchase, the complainant has not been able to use the PHILIPS TV 55”. The complainant had visited the Customers Care Centre, 3^rd opposite party herein, on several occasions and it was repaired temporarily and thereafter the problems recurred once again. The last such visit to the Service Centre of the 3^rd opposite party on 16.09.2017 on account of PCB Board Problem, on which date the PCB Board was replaced at a cost of Rs.1,300/- paid by complainant to 3^rd opposite party within the warranty period. Even though the warranty for the PHILIPS TV 55” is for five years, the complainant was made to pay the replacement cost of the PCB Board Problem on 16.09.2017. As per the terms and conditions of the service center, the 3^rd opposite party undertook to provide replaceable warranty for the PHILIPS TV 55”, but the 3^rd opposite party had failed to adhere to the terms and conditions of the contract by collecting a sum of Rs.1,300/- towards the service cost on 16.09.2017.  Even after the replacement of the PCB Board, the PHILIPS TV 55” is not working properly and therefore the complainant had to once again give the PHILIPS TV 55” for repairs to the Customer Care Centre of the 3^rd opposite party. Till date, the PHILIPS TV 55” is yet to be repaired and given back to the complainant.  The complainant has suffered mental agony due to the deficiency in service and unfair trade practice committed by the opposite parties in not repairing, not handed over the 3^rd opposite party PHILIPS TV 55” and also by supplying a defective PHILIPS TV 55” from 1^st opposite party to the complainant. The complainant suffered mental agony because of the opposite party’s deceptive unfair trade practice as PHILIPS TV 55”  is within the warranty period. The opposite parties, as per the warranty letter issued by the Agreement holder to Philips Customer Service to 3^rd opposite party defects service, the 1^st opposite party is liable to replace the PHILIPS TV 55”  but the 3^rd opposite party have failed and neglected either to return the defective PHILIPS TV 55”  or to replace the new PHILIPS TV 55”  in spite of repeated demands  and several requests made by the complainant. The complainant issued legal notice through his counsel to the all the opposite parties on 05.04.2018. The 1^st opposite party had received the said legal notice on 13.04.2018, the 2^nd opposite party had received the same on 06.04.2018 and the 3^rd opposite party had refused to receive of the legal notice. The 1^st and 2^nd opposite parties have not sent any reply to the complainant’s counsel. The 1^st and 3^rd  opposite parties service center have not yet replaced with new one PHILIPS TV 55”  handed over by the complainant to the 3^rd opposite party after lapse of several months and incurred a loss of Rs.67,000/- to the complainant. Hence the complaint.

 

           2. The opposite parties called absent and they were set ex – parte.

          3. The complainant had come forward with his proof affidavit and documents. Ex.A1 to Ex.A9 were marked on the side of the complainant.

           4. The complainant had come forward with his written argument and the oral argument of the complainant was also heard.

5. POINTS FOR CONSIDERATION:

          1. Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties?

          2. Whether the complainant is entitled to any relief? If so to what extent?

6. POINT NO :1 

          The complainant purchased PHILIPS TV 55” No.1928 from the 2^nd opposite party for an amount  of Rs.67,000/- vide cash bill Ex.A1. Ex.A2 is the warranty Card by which 5 years warranty is applicable on purchase of TV bearing No.55PFL5059. Ever since the date of purchase the complainant was unable to use the TV and it caused many problems every now and then as per the complaint. The complainant had visited the 3^rd opposite party  for his TV service on several occasions, the problem recurred again and again after repair. The complainant had also sent e-mail vide Ex.A3 to the 1^st opposite party’s customer care and had received the reply, apologizing for the inconvenience caused and giving assurance to forward the complaint to the concerned department. Subsequently PCP  Board was replaced and Rs.1,300/- was paid as charges under Ex.A4 receipt. Even after  replacing of PCP board TV is not working properly again and the complainant had once again given the  TV  for the repair to the 3^rd opposite party.

          7. The complainant would contend that TV is not repaired yet and handed over to the complainant and  the 1^st opposite party had supplied a defective PHILIPS TV 55” to the complainant. According to the complainant, he had purchased newly arrived PHILIPS TV 55” on seeing the advertisement and out of interest by his family members. As per warranty card PHILIPS TV 55” purchased by the complainant from 2^nd opposite party is well within the  warranty period. Legal notice was issued by the counsel for complainant to 1 to 3 opposite parties under Ex.A5 was received by the  1^st opposite party, and the postal track consignment is marked as Ex.A6. The 2^nd opposite party had received the notice and the acknowledgement card is Ex.A7 and 3^rd opposite party has refused to receive the notice and return cover is Ex.A8. There was no reply from the opposite parties and   therefore  the complainant had given  a representation to 2^nd & 3^rd opposite parties and  the acknowledgement card is Ex.A9.

          8. Even after  receipt of the notice in this CC.No.69/2018 the opposite parties  neither appeared before the court nor shown any interest to controvert case of the complainant. Therefore this Forum has to believe of the case of the complainant based  on the documents furnished by him. The purchased TV from 2^nd opposite party is  lying with 3^rd opposite party for  rectifying  the service and 2^nd opposite party had supplied defective TV which is manufactured by the 1^st opposite party.  The opposite party is liable to replace the new TV of PHILIPS TV 55” in lieu of the defective set or else to refund the cost of the TV. In spite of request of the complainant opposite parties have not taken care to either rectify or to replace the TV. Therefore it amounts to deficiency in service and also unfair trade  practice. Therefore  point No.1 is answered against the opposite parties.   

09. POINT NO:2

          The complainant and family would have suffered mental agony for  non usage of purchased of TV. The opposite parties are jointly or severally liable to refund a sum of  Rs.67,000/- towards the cost of the TV with 9% interest from date of which the TV was given for service i.e. on 16.09.2017 to till the date of realization. Therefore the opposite parties are liable to pay compensation for mental agony and also for unfair trade practice. Therefore it is fit and proper to order compensation of  Rs.60,000/- for mental agony and hardship suffered caused to the complainant and  to pay Rs.5,000/- for costs.  

          In the result the Complaint is partly allowed. The Opposite Parties 1 to 3 jointly or severally  are  directed to refund a sum of Rs.67,000/- (Rupees sixty seven thousand only) to the Complainant with interest @ 9% from 16.09.2017  till the date of realization and also to pay a sum of Rs.60,000/- (Rupees sixty thousand only) as compensation for mental  agony, hardship besides, a sum of Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only) for costs.

The above amount shall be paid to the complainant within 6 weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order.

          Dictated to the Steno-Typist transcribed and typed by her corrected and pronounced by us on this 19^th  day of February 2019.

 

MEMBER – I                                                                PRESIDENT

LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE COMPLAINANT:

Ex.A1 dated 14.10.2015                   Copy of Purchase Invoice

Ex.A2 dated NIL                     Copy of Warranty Card

Ex.A3 dated NIL                     E-mail to 1^st opposite party

Ex.A4 dated 16.09.2017                   Cash payment invoice to 3^rd opposite party

Ex.A5 dated 05.04.2018                   Copy of Legal Notice to opposite parties

Ex.A6 dated 13.04.2018                   Postal Tracks consignments of 1^st opposite party

                                                     delivered

 

Ex.A7 dated NIL                     Copy of Acknowledgement card of 2^nd opposite party

 

Ex.A8 dated NIL                     Returned cover of legal notice from 3^rd opposite

                                                    party

 

Ex.A9 dated 25.04.2018                   Complainants representation to opposite parties 1,2

                                                     & 3 and AD Cards

 

 

                                               

MEMBER – I                                                               PRESIDENT