COMPLAINT RESTORED ON: 10.03.2010
DISPOSED ON: 05.01.2011
BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES RE
DRESSAL FORUM AT BANGALORE (URBAN)
DATED THIS THE 5TH JANUARY 2011
PRESENT:- SRI. B.S. REDDY PRESIDENT
SMT. M. YASHODHAMMA MEMBER
SRI. A. MUNIYAPPA MEMBER
COMPLAINT NO.2827/2009
Complainant | Muralidhar Rao, C-103, Mantri Classic, 4th Block, Koramangala, Bangalore – 560 034. In Person V/s. |
OPPOSITE PARTY | G X Systems & Services, 126/B, 33rd Cross, 11th Main, 4th Block, Jayanagar, Bangalore – 560 011. Advocate: Sri K.N.Gangadhara |
O R D E R
SRI. B.S. REDDY, PRESIDENT
The complainant in person filed this complaint seeking direction against the Opposite Party (herein after called as O.P) to refund on amount of Rs.5,500/- and to pay compensation of Rs.5,000/- on the allegations of deficiency in service.
2. In the complaint it is stated that in response to the complaint about the malfunctioning and complainant’s DAEWOO fridge, OP sent their personnel and after technical examination, replaced the compressor on the 17th March 2009 against complainant’s paying cash of Rs.5,500/- under bill No.3155. Within a few weeks thereof, the problem recurred and on further technical examination, OP stated that the compressor again needs to be replaced and they will undertaking the task immediately. After pursuing OP for close to 8 months since then, on 23rd November, the complainant gave up and bought new refrigerator with a request to OP to return Rs.5,500/- paid by him. OP refused to do so. Hence the complaint.
3. On appearance, OP filed version contending that the complaint has to be rejected, as there is no averments about the supply of defective goods or providing the deficiency of service against OP. The complainant was introduced through one of Videocon Customer to OP in the month of January – 2009. The complainant requested to get repair his refrigerator manufactured by M/s Daweoo Electronics which has closed all their activities from several years in India. The complainant stated he could find no service center of Daewoo Company in Bangalore, apart from that no service center is ready to provide the service and get repair the same, as the suitable components in the market is not easily available. Further the complainant finally approached the OP by knowing OP’s expertiseness in providing wide services to the home appliances. The service engineers of the OP after verification of the refrigerator opined it needed to be serviced and need to be replaced some other accessories. OP informed the complainant original components manufactured by parent company will not be available, OP has to search for the suitable components in the market manufactured by different companies for which they don’t give any guarantee or warranty; if complainant agrees to that they would be ready to take up the repair work. The complainant has clearly agreed, after taking month time, OP got suitable component in the market and the same has been replaced by removing old compressor from the non-working refrigerator and full service had been rendered to bring the same for working condition. After satisfying the services of OP, finally on 17.03.2010 OP raised cash bill for Rs.5,500/- which includes component charges, service charges, transport charges for carrying materials and charges towards the filling of gas and material to the refrigerator, in that OP has not promised any warranty for the replaced component. After successful functioning for the successive 7 months, in the month of October the complainant informed the OP that the compressor is making little noise than its normal function, except that cooling and other functions in the refrigerator was very normal condition. After, receiving the complaint, immediately the service engineer was attended the call and confirmed that the compressor was little noisy, except that everything is OK. Even after promise that nothing would happen if the fridge runs in the present condition, but the complainant disagreed, requested to change the compressor, for this the OP inspite of not giving warranty / guarantee agreed to replace the same on purely on humanitarian ground and sought more time, as once again they have to search in the market for purchasing the suitable components. Finally they got suitable component on 12.11.2009 and promised to attend the complaint immediately. On 13.11.2009 when the service engineer of OP visited the house of the complainant with new compressor, the complainant has refused and declined the entry for undertaking the replacing the component, instead the complainant has demanded the refund of his money, failing which he has warned for dire consequences. OP has always and even now ready to replace the compressor in the place of old one, the complainant just to gain illegally and unlawfully demanded back the amount paid which cannot be payable as OP has not promised any warranty of the components replaced. OP is not liable to pay any amount, as OP has not committed any deficiency of service or supplied any substandard components. On the risk of the complainant only repair work of the refrigerator has been undertaken, further. The Daewoo company which was manufactured the complainant’s refrigerator was no more working in India from past several years. Hence it is prayed to dismiss the complaint.
4. In order to substantiate the complaint averments, the complainant filed affidavit evidence. The Proprietor of OP filed affidavit evidence and produced documents.
5. Arguments heard on both sides. Points for our consideration are:
Point No.1:- Whether the complainant proved the
deficiency in service on the part of
the OP?
Point No.2:- Whether the complainant is entitled
for the reliefs now claimed?
Point No.3:- To what Order?
6. We record our findings on the above points as under:
Point No.1:- Negative.
Point No.2:- Negative.
Point No.3:- As per final Order.
R E A S O N S
7. At the out set it is not at dispute that at the request of the complainant his refrigerator manufactured by M/s Daweoo Electronics which was not in working condition was repaired by replacing the compressor of the refrigerator on 17.03.2010 by OP and collected an amount of Rs.5,500/- from the complainant by issuing cash bill marked as Annexure -1. In the said bill the component charges he shown at Rs.4,200/-, service charges Rs.300/-, transport charges Rs.325/-, gas and metal charges Rs.675/-, total Rs.5,500/-. M/s Daweoo Electronics the Korean based company has closed all their activities from several years in India, as such the companies components were not available in the market, OP purchased the component (compressor) manufactured by some other company. After replacing the compressor of the refrigerator, for the first time on 12.10.2009, the complainant had sent e-mail to OP stating that in response to his complaint about malfunction of his fridge, OP sent his personal and after technical examination replaced the compressor on 17.03.2009 against paying cash of Rs.5,500/-. Within a few weeks thereof, however the problem recurred and on further technical examination you (OP) stated that the compressor again needs to be replaced and that he will be undertaking the task immediately. Months have passed since then and action from your (OP) side is still pending; requested the needful immediately. For the said e-mail OP had sent reply on the same day stating that at present there is no stock of this particular model of compressor, please bear with us (OP) for another 4-5 days and we will complete your job positively. We deeply regret the inconvenience caused due to the delay.
8. The complainant submitted that till 12.10.2009 he has repeated the complaint about the non-functioning of the replaced compressor to OP on phone, but has not attended the complaints. In our view, there is no material to hold that after replacement of the compressor it worked only for few weeks. Even in the e-mail dated 12.10.2009, the complainant has requested OP to do the needful immediately. Thereafter due to non-availability of the component OP was unable to replace the same and on 12.11.2009 after OP got the suitable component, informed the complainant through e-mail stating that they have received the compressor today, they will be completing the complaint tomorrow. The said e-mail by way of reply to e-mail dated 09.11.2009 sent by the complainant stating that a lady responding on landline has confirmed that the defective compressor will be replaced in 2-3 days i.e., latest by 12th November, please ensure same; for that the complainant was informed by e-mail dated 12.11.2009 OP will be attending on the next day 13.11.2009. Accordingly on 13.11.2009 when the service engineer of OP visited with new compressor to the house of the complainant for replacing the same, the complainant has refused undertaking the replacement, instead he demanded the refund of his money paid through his cash bill.
9. It may be noted even in the e-mail dated 09.11.2009, the complainant has expressed his desire to get the compressor replaced with request to the OP to ensure that the compressor will be replaced in 2-3 days i.e., latest 12th November. When the service engineer of OP visited the house of the complainant on 13.11.2009 with new compressor, the complainant has refused for undertaking the replacement of the compressor. Though there was no any warranty for the compressor purchased in attending the repairs of the refrigerator, but still OP had sent the new compressor through its service engineer for replacement. OP cannot be blamed, while undertaking the repairs; OP had informed the complainant that the parent company M/s Daewoo Company was no more working in India; as it has closed all its operation long back. Original components manufactured by its parent company will not be availed; OP will search the suitable components manufactured by different company; for which they do not give any guarantee and warranty to the compressor. For that the complainant has clearly agreed; thereafter OP has undertaken the repair work by getting the suitable component and has replaced by removing the old one. OP was not able to get the component immediately for replacement; it cannot be said that there is any deficiency in service on the part of the OP. The complainant purchased new refrigerator on 23.11.2009, earlier to that on 13.11.2009 he refused for undertaking the replacement of the component. Therefore the complainant is not entitled to seek for refund of the amount paid towards cost of component and other charges. OP has charged only Rs.300/- towards service charges. The complaint is devoid of merits. Accordingly we proceed to pass the following:
O R D E R
The complaint filed by the complainant is dismissed. Considering the nature of dispute no order as to costs.
Send copy of this order to both the parties free of costs.
(Dictated to the Stenographer and typed in the computer and transcribed by him, verified and corrected, and then pronounced in the Open Court by us on this the 5th day of January – 2011.)
PRESIDENT
MEMBER MEMBER
Snm:
