Kerala

Kottayam

CC/09/135

Josekutty Mathew - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Manager - Opp.Party(s)

25 Feb 2010

ORDER


KottayamConsumer Disputes Redressal Forum,Civil Station, Kottayam
CONSUMER CASE NO. 09 of 135
1. Josekutty MathewErurickal(H),Kanjiramattom.P.OKottyamKerala ...........Appellant(s)

Vs.
1. The ManagerKENSTAR,Kitchen Appliances India Ltd.,No.30/1176,Kaniampuzha Road,Vytila,Cochin-682019Kerala ...........Respondent(s)


For the Appellant :
For the Respondent :

Dated : 25 Feb 2010
ORDER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.

 

CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KOTTAYAM

Present

Sri.Santhosh Kesavanath.P. President

Smt.Bindhu M.Thomas Member

Sri.K.N.Radhakrishnan Member.


 

CC.No.135/09

Thursday, the day of 25th, February, 2010.


 

Petitioner Josekutty Mathew

Erurickal house

Kanjiramattom.P.O.

(Adv.M.J.Joseph Mannarath)

Vs.

Opposite parties. 1. The Manager

KENSTAR

Kichen Appliances India Ltd.

No.30/1176, Kaniampuzha Road

Vythila, Kochin-682019.

2. The Manager

Kallarackal Agencies

Mallathil Building, Pala.


 

O R D E R

Sri.K.N.Radhakrishnan, Member.


 

The case of complainant is as follows.

He had purchased a washing machine from the 2nd opposite party for an amount of Rs.16,500/- on 4.9.2006 which was manufactured by the Ist opposite party. At the time of purchase of the washing machine the opposite parties provided 24 months warranty from the date of purchase of the machine. After a few months of purchase the machine became defective. The used to jumb while it was working and leaking water from the machine and fell the filtry water to the room where the machine installed and gradually its functions was stopped. As per the request of the complainant the opposite parties agent shiju John inspected the machine and found defect in 'Drive card' system and he replaced it and thus repaired the machine on 24.5.2007. After a few days the machine showed the same complaint and again as per the request the same person checked the

-2-

machine and stated that there was defect in 'Drive card' system and again he repaireds the machine on 11.6.2007. After few days of the second repair the defect was seen to the machine. Then the complainant understood that the machine having manufacturing defects and there was deficiencies in service on the prt of the opposite parties. So the complainant approached the opposite parties either to replace the machine or to extended the warranty. But the opposite parties has not done anything. Hence the complainant approached this forum and filed a complaint as CC.180/08. On the basis of the submission made by the opposite parties and the complainant CC.180/08 was disposed of as the warranty was issued to the complainant from 5-9-08 to 4-9-09 after its perfect repairement. Eventhough the opposite parties repaired the washing machine on 2.9.08 it began to show complaint from February Ist week itself within few weeks its complete finctions became standstill and the machine became useless. Both the opposite parties are jointly and severally liable to compensate the complainant. Hence this complaint.

The notices were served with the opposite parties. They did not appear either in person or through their counsel even after accepting the notice from this forum. Hence the opposite parties set ex-parte.

The complainant filed proof affidavit and documents which are marked as exhibits A1 to A7.

Heard complainant. We have gone through the complaint, documents and evidences. The case of the complainant is that the washing machine became defective even after a few months after purchase. From the available evidence it can be seen that the washing machine became defective and some times it was tried to rectify the defects. Moreover the opposite parties had issued extended warranty on the basis of the earlier complaint filed by the complainant before this forum as CC.180/08. Hence it is presumed that the machine having some major problem. So we have no reasons to disbelieve the case of the complainant. The case of the complainant stand un-challenged by the opposite parties even after accepting the notice from this forum. Both the

-3-

opposite parties are jointly and severally liable to compensate the complainant. Hence we are of the opinion that the case of the complainant is to be allowed.

In the result the complaint is allowed as follows. (1) We direct the opposite parties to refund the price of the washing machine ie. Rs.16,500/- to the complainant and pay Rs.1500/- as compensation for in conveniences and pay Rs.1000/- as costs of these proceedings. The order shall be complied with within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.


 

Sri.K.N.Radhakrishnan Member Sd/-

Sri.Santhosh Kesavanath.P. President Sd/-

Smt.Bindhu M.Thomas Member. Sd/-


 

APPENDIX

Documents produced by the complainant.

  1. A1 is the instruction Guide of the washing machine.

  2. A1(a) is the copy of certificate of warranty.

  3. A2 is the copy of service card slip.

  4. A3 is the copy of service card slip.

  5. A4 is the extended warranty dt. 2.9.08.

  6. A5 is the copy of lawyer notice dt. 16.3.09.

  7. A6 is the postal receipts

  8. A7 is the postal A/D card.

                      By Orders,

 

Senior Superintendent.

Kgr/5 copies.

                       

                       

                       

 


HONORABLE Bindhu M Thomas, MemberHONORABLE Santhosh Kesava Nath P, PRESIDENTHONORABLE K.N Radhakrishnan, Member