Chandigarh

DF-II

CC/347/2015

Gurcharan Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Manager Reliance Retail Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

29 Oct 2015

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II, U.T. CHANDIGARH

======

Consumer Complaint  No	:	347 of 2015
Date  of  Institution	:	6/7/2015
Date   of   Decision	:	29/10/2015

 

 

 

 

 

Gurcharan Singh S/o late Sh. Amarjit Singh R/o H. No. 1195, Phase V, Mohali.

             …..Complainant

Versus

 

1. The Manager Reliance Retail Ltd. shop No. 247, 2^nd Floor Elante Mall, Industrial Area and Buisseness Park, Phase I, Chandigarh.
2. The Area Service Manager, LG Electronic India Pvt. Ltd. Plot No. 194-95 2^nd Floor Industrial Area Phase II, Chandigarh.
3. Manager LG Electronics India Pvt. Ltd. A-wing 3^rd floor, District Entre, Saket New, Delhi 110017.

….. Opposite Parties

 

BEFORE:  SH.RAJAN DEWAN                 PRESIDENT

         SH.JASWINDER SINGH SIDHU       MEMBER

         MRS.PRITI MALHOTRA             MEMBER

 

 

For complainant         :     Sh. Aman Deep Singh, Advocate

 

For OP No.1             :     Sh. Gaurav Bhardwaj, Advocate

For OP No.2 &3          :     Sh. Arjun Grover, Advocate  

 

 

PER PRITI MALHOTRA, MEMBER

 

 

          As per the case of the complainant he purchased one fridge from Opposite Party No.1 vide invoice dated 26.3.2015 for a sum of Rs.28,290/-. It has been alleged that the said fridge when put to operation it did not work properly and it was found to be defective. A complaint was lodged with the Opposite Parties by the complainant. The Opposite Parties changed the compressor of the fridge.  But even then the said fridge did not work properly.  Again a complaint was lodged with the Opposite Parties who then changed the PCB of the fridge but the fridge still did not work properly. The complainant requested the Opposite Parties to change the defective fridge but they refused to do so. The complainant served a legal notice upon the Opposite Parties but to no avail. Alleging the said act of OPs as deficiency in service, this compliant has been filed.

 

2.     The Opposite Party No.1 in its written statement while admitting the factual matrix of the case stated that the complaint is not maintainable against it as no specific allegations have been made against it in the complaint. It has been asserted that Opposite Party No.1 is a seller of various electronic items of many manufactures at its Reliance Digital Stores. It is not involved in the manufacturing of product in question at any stage and is not liable for the manufacturing defect in the product, if any. Hence there is no deficiency on the part of Opposite Party No.1 and the complaint against it be dismissed.

 

3.     Opposite Party No.2 and 3 in their joint reply have stated that the complainant for the first time approached them regarding cooling issue in the refrigerator on 11.4.2015. The engineer of the answering Opposite Parties immediately visited the complainant and replaced the PCB of the refrigerator and thereafter the refrigerator was working fine as per the complainant’s full satisfaction as is evident from job card Annexure R-1. Thereafter the complainant again contacted the answering Opposite Parties on 15.4.2015. The engineer of the answering Opposite Parties found that there was problem in the compressor and the complainant was informed that the same would be replaced free of costs as the fridge was under warranty. The complainant initially refused to do so but on 7.5.2015 again contacted for replacement of the compressor accordingly the same was replaced and the fridge was perfectly working to the satisfaction of the complainant as is apparent from job card Annexure R-3. Answering Opposite Parties submitted that despite this the complainant sent legal Notice to Opposite Party No.1 on 11.5.2015. Being principle the Opposite Party company replied the same and requested the complainant for thorough inspection of the product in question but to no avail. Thereafter the complainant again contacted on 4.6.2015 for sound issue in the fridge the engineers visited the complainant and found that there is no such issue and the fridge was working properly. Pleading no deficiency in service and denying rest of the allegations, it is prayed that the complaint be dismissed.
4.     Parties led evidence in support of their contentions.
5.     We have heard the ld. Counsel for the parties and have also perused the record.
6.     The allegation of the complainant that he has been supplied defective refrigerator by the Opposite Parties is well proved from the job sheets placed on record by the Opposite Parties  No. 2&3 as exhibit R-1 to R-3 and R-5.  
   Exhibit R-1 job sheet dated 11.4.2015 reveals that the refrigerator purchased by the complainant on 1.4.2015 for a sum of Rs.28,290/- got out of order, and when complained the same, PCB thereof was  replaced by the engineers of Opposite Parties No.2&3. Thereafter when again the refrigerator went out of order on complaint the engineers of the Opposite Parties reported that compressor of the refrigerator needs replacement but at that juncture the complainant refused to change the same and asked for the replacement of the refrigerator itself as is evident from Exhibit R-2 job sheet dated 16.4.2015.  When the request of the complainant was not accepted by the Opposite Parties then the complainant under compulsion agreed to the replacement of the compressor, which as per job sheet dated 7.5.2015 (Exhibit R-3) was replaced with additional replacement of drier and gas was also changed on that occasion.  Despite this the refrigerator again became defective and again package assembly was adjusted as is evident from Exhibit R-5 job sheet dated 4.6.2015.
7.     The complainant claimed that despite numerous repairs the refrigerator is still not working properly, thus he served a legal notice to Opposite Party No.1. The said legal notice was replied by Opposite Party No.3 being the principle vide letter dated 19.5.2015 requesting therein to the complainant to got registered the complaint with LG customer care regarding inspection of the refrigerator by giving convenient date and time for engineer’s visit in order to inspect the refrigerator, in question.
8.     It is gathered that the complainant find it suitable to approach this Forum for the redressal of his grievance by filing the instant complaint. During the course of arguments the complainant agitated that there is no use to inspect the refrigerator as the engineers of the Opposite Parties have already repaired the same for number of times by replacing PCB, and compressor and other parts etc. We agree with the contention of the complainant and are of the view that it will be a matter of further harassment and inconvenience to the complainant, if re-inspection of the refrigerator is ordered. As it was the bounden duty of the engineers of the Opposite Parties to thoroughly inspect the refrigerator on the earlier occasions when the same become defective, which apparently happened four times.  Hence there is a clear cut deficiency on the part of the Opposite Parties as they failed to set right the newly purchased refrigerator in question despite numerous repairs made by them, which defeated the very purpose of the purchase of the product in question.  Thus, we are of the view that certainly there is manufacturing defect in the refrigerator, which is not repairable so the complainant is entitled for refund of the amount spent for the refrigerator in question.
9.     In view of the above discussion, we are of the opinion that the complaint deserves to be allowed.  Accordingly, the complaint is allowed and the Opposite Parties are jointly & severally directed as under:-

        

a]  To refund Rs.28,290/- being the cost of the refrigerator to the complainant;

 

b]  To pay Rs.8,000/- as compensation for causing mental agony and physical harassment to the complainant.

C]  To pay Rs.5,000/- towards litigation expenses.

 

9        The above said order shall be complied with by the Opposite Parties within 45 days of its receipt, failing which they shall be liable to pay interest on the above awarded amount of Rs.28,290/- at (a) being the cost of refrigerator as well as on the compensation amount at (b) at the rate of 9% p.a. from the date of this order till it is paid, besides paying litigation expenses.

 

10.      The certified copy of this order be sent to the parties free of charge, after which the file be consigned.

Announced

29.10.2015                   

                                                                                       Sd/-  

 (RAJAN DEWAN)

PRESIDENT

 

Sd/-

 (JASWINDER SINGH SIDHU)

MEMBER

 

 

Sd/-

(PRITI MALHOTRA)

MEMBER