By. Smt. Renimol Mathew, Member:-

The complaint is filed under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act of 1986 against the opposite parties to return the price of the defective Air conditioner unit purchased from opposite party No.1 with compensation and cost of the proceedings.

2. Brief of the complaint:- On 12.03.2011 the complainant purchased a one ton split Air conditioner with Model No. V.G. 400 from the 1^st opposite party. It is manufactured by 2^nd opposite party and the total amount for the Air conditioner unit was Rs.25,450/- which including the cost of the stabilizer and installation charges and the technicians from opposite parties installed the Air conditioner unit. At that time it was seen that the Air conditioner unit is not at all working and the technician informed the complainant that the board of the Air conditioner unit is faulty and the very next day itself technicians of the opposite party replaced the board. Thereafter it was seen that no sufficient cooling. Then complainant made several oral complaints and formal complaints to the opposite parties. Thereafter another technician inspected the unit and informed that the Air conditioner unit installed in the complainant’s house is an old one by affixing a new sticker. This was informed to the 1^st opposite party, it was assured by him that he will change the unit as such. Thereafter the technicians of the opposite parties taken the unit for repair. But even after repeated requests and elapse of several months opposite parties was not installed the Air conditioner units. Hence filed this complaint.

3. Notice served to opposite parties, they appeared before the Forum and filed version. As per the written version of opposite party No.1 there is no cause of action against this opposite party. He admitted the purchase of Air conditioner unit manufactured by 2^nd opposite party from his shop. This opposite party is only a dealer of 2^nd opposite party. The role of this opposite party is only to sell the product manufactured by the 2nd opposite party and all further responsibilities such as giving warranty, installation, periodic service and to attend and clear for all further complaints are all that of the 2nd opposite party. The customer complaints were reported to the toll free number of the 2^nd opposite party. The 2^nd opposite party is bound to attend the same in time. On 16.08.2011 and 29.09.2011 the complainant approached the 1^stopposite party and informed about the complaint of the Air conditioner unit. Accordingly this opposite party informed the complainant that the 2nd opposite party is the responsible person to give necessary service and to advised the complainant to register complaint with the 2nd opposite party in their toll free number.

4. 2^nd opposite party filed version in short is as follows:- This opposite party was not aware of the purchase of Air conditioner unit by complainant. 1^st opposite party is carried out the installation of the Air conditioner through an unauthorized installer. The averment that Air conditioner was not in working condition was not in the knowledge of this opposite party. The replacement of mother board was also not in the knowledge of this opposite party. The 1^st opposite party only brought to the notice to the 2^nd opposite party at a much later stage and the

averment that the complainant made several oral and formal complaints are denied by this opposite party. They never received any complaint regarding this. Then the service center of the 2^nd opposite party contacted the complainant and rectified the Air conditioner unit. Thereafter several time they contacted the complainant to hand over the unit to the complainant. However the complainant refused to take back the Air conditioner from the personals of service center. Therefore they were constrained to send a registered letter to the complainant bringing into his notice that the unit was ready. But complainant refused to accept the same and it was returned to the service center. Hence the Air conditioner of the complainant is still laying idle in the premises of the 2^nd opposite party. Hence 2^nd opposite party stated that the complainant is not entitled for any relief.

5. Subsequently the 3^rd opposite party is impleaded and they filed version stating that it is not known for this opposite party that the purchase of Air conditioner, installation, fault and change of new board, non working and insufficient cooling etc.. Immediately after the entrustment this opposite party had serviced the Air conditioner Unit within 20 days of the receipt of the same and this opposite party informed the first opposite party about, the service and requested to inform the customer regarding the service of the Air conditioner Unit. But even after repeated requests also no response was received from the first opposite party but on several occasions the 1st opposite party assured that they inform the party and make necessary arrangements to take back the Air conditioner unit. Further stated that this opposite party is keeping the Air conditioner unit for the last two and half years. Hence prayed to dismiss the complaint.

6. On considering the complaint, versions and documents the Forum raised the following points for consideration:-

1. Whether there is any deficiency of service from the part of opposite parties?

2.Relief and Cost.

7. Points No.1 & 2:- Complainant filed proof affidavit and examined as PW1. Ext.A1 to A4 documents were also marked. 1^st Opposite party also filed affidavit and examined as OPW1. Here in this case the defect of the Air conditioner unit is admitted by all the parties. Date of purchase in Ext.A1 is shown as 12.03.2011. But in Ext.A4 it is seen that PCB of the Air conditioner unit is replaced ie 2 days after the purchase. In Ext.A3 dated 04.11.2011 we found that 3^rd opposite party taken the Air conditioner unit for service due to “no cooling”. The complaint is filed on 21.04.2012, till this date complainant could not get the Air conditioner unit after repairs.

8. On going through the written version submitted by opposite parties. All the parties admitted the complaint in the Air conditioner unit. Service persons from 2^nd opposite party rectified the defects and tried to handover the unit to the complainant but complainant refused to accept the same. Thereafter 3^rd opposite party sent Registered letter to the complainant bringing into his notice that the unit was ready. But the complainant refused to accept it and it was returned to the service center. The service center promptly rectified the defects of the unit and they are ready to handover the same to the complainant. But in support of this 3^rd opposite party could not produce any evidence before this Forum.

9. On going through the evidences and records Forum found that the Air conditioner unit become defective at the very next day of the purchase itself. Complainant could not avail the benefit of the product during this period. Now 4 years have elapsed after the purchase of Air conditioner unit. Hence the Forum is of the opinion that there is deficiency of service from the part of opposite parties, hence the complainant is entitled to get price of the Air conditioner with cost and compensation. The Points are found accordingly.

In the result, the complaint is partly allowed and the opposite party No.2 is directed to pay the bill amount of Rs.25,450/- (Twenty Five Thousand Four Hundred and Fifty) only with compensation of Rs.5,000/-(Rupees Five Thousand) only to the complainant. The opposite parties No.1 and 3 are directed to pay Rs.1,000/- (Rupees One Thousand) only each to the complainant as cost of the proceedings. This Order must be complied by the opposite parties within 30 days from the date of receipt of this Order failing which the complainant is entitled for interest at the rate of 12% for the whole amount.

Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by him and corrected by me and Pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 29^th day of May 2015.

Date of Filing:21.04.2012. PRESIDENT :Sd/-

MEMBER :Sd/-

MEMBER :Sd/-

/True Copy/

Sd/-

PRESIDENT, CDRF, WAYANAD.

APPENDIX.

Witness for the complainant:-

PW1. Saji. T. C. Complainant.

Witness for the Opposite Parties:-

OPW1. Sunil Kumar. Managing Partner, Thomsons Associates, Kalpetta.

Exhibits for the complainant:

A1. Bill. Dt:12.03.2011.

A2. Owners Manual.

A3. Job Sheet. Dt:04.11.2011.

A4. Receipt. Dt:14.03.2011.

Exhibits for the opposite parties:-

Nil.

Sd/-

PRESIDENT, CDRF, WAYANAD.

a/-