Presented by Miss B.L.Dora, Member. <br /> In this case, the Complainant has purchased a vertis(w) model of Voltas Brand A.C from the Opposite Parties No. 1(one), who is the authorized local dealer of Opposite Parties No. 2(two), on payment of Rs.14,755/-(Rupees fourteen thousand seven hundred fifty-five)only with VAT of Rs.2,144.44/-(Rupees two thousand one hundred forty-four and forty-four paisa)only in total Rs.16,899.44/-(Rupees sixteen thousand eight hundred ninety-nine and forty-four paisa)only vide Bill No 894, on Dt.22/09/2008. The Opposite Parties have issued the Complainant the guarantee card, user manual etc. of the said A.C during purchase of it. The said A.C was installed at the Complainant's residence by the Opposite Party's company technician. But after a month the A.C started providing of lack cooling effect. Then, the Complainant made complain before the Opposite Parties about this. The Opposite Party No. 2(two) has delivered a S.M.S to the Complainant stating therein to attend his problem shortly.<br /> <br /> After some days, the Opposite Parties sent a technician who examined the A.C and advised for the replacement of some mechanical parts of it. The technician took those defective parts with him and came after two days with the same parts and said about the genuineness of those parts. Then he fitted those parts in the A.C and left from there, without awaiting any result.<br /> <br /> When the A.C did not function even after the operation, the Complainant placed his grievance before the Opposite Parties on Dt.15/02/2009 but no result. So, finding no other way, the Complainant served a pleader's notice on Dt.06/05/2009, calling the Opposite Parties to replace the same with new one and compensate him with Rs.15,000/- (Rupees fifteen thousand)only for mental pain and harassment due to their deficient Act. The Opposite Parties No.1(one) gave no reply and kept mum where as the Opposite Parties No. 2(two)gave formal reply without trying to solve the factual problem. Hence, this case.<br /> <br /> Due to the deficiency in service by the Opposite Parties, the very purpose of the purchasing A.C could not solved. The Complainant has also suffered with monetary and physical loss due to the negligent attitude by the Opposite Parties. In view of this, the Opposite Parties are liable to compensate him both in terms of money and goods i.e Rs.15,000/-(Rupees fifteen thousand)only and the replacement of A.C with a new one of same brand and specification with Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand)only for litigation.<br /> <br /> In order to strengthen his case, the Complainant relies on the documents relates to purchase of A.C with guarantee period thereof, office copy of pleader notice Dt.06/05/2009, postal receipts A.D. Card etc.<br /> In response to this, the Opposite Parties No. 1(one) filed his version denying all allegations made against the Opposite Parties. Stating that, the Opposite Parties gave prompt service to the Complainant on his complain, by making necessary repairing/replacement of the parts of the A.C. The A.C was re-installed in the house of the Complainant with their satisfaction and trial vide service report on Dt.15/08/2009. Again on Dt.27/08/2009, the authorized service man of the Opposite Parties, visited the Complainant's residence for the inspection of the A.C. but the Complainant does not allowed him to enter in his house or inspect the A.C.. The Opposite Parties is ready to demonstrate the A.C before the Forum to the end of justice.<br /> <br /> The Opposite Parties No 2(two) has failed to appear before the Forum after receiving of summon and has been set ex-parte in this case.<br /> <br /> Perused the documents and heard from the Parties, it is agreed that the Complainant is a consumer of the Opposite Parties. The guarantee period for the A.C is also not disputed. On verification of both Party's documents filed, it is found out that, the Opposite Parties sent the technician to the Complainant's residence who took some parts out of the A.C for correction and assured to retain back after ten days the complain petition state that he took back the same parts and replaced it, then returned back without seeing any result. This shows that, there are several vital manufacturing defects occurred which needs replacement of the primary fitted parts amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the Opposite Parties.<br /> <br /> The Opposite Parties have also failed to prove with any documentary evidence that, they gave full and satisfactory service to the Complainant or responded the pleader notice sent by the Complainant on them, before filing of the case.<br /> <br /> The case is filed on Dt.08/07/2009 and the Opposite Parties No. 1(one) has filed the xerox copy of service reports on Dt.11/08/2009, Dt.15/08/2009, Dt.27/08/2009, after one month and there after amounts to grass negligence in duty and deficiency in providing proper service by the Opposite Parties to wards the Consumer.<br /> In view of all these circumstances, the Complaint petition is allowed.<br /> <br /> The Opposite Parties are directed, jointly and severally, to replace the defective A.C with a new one of the same brand and specification and to pay a sum of Rs.4,000/-(Rupees four thousand)only as compensation for mental agony and litigation to the Complainant within thirty days hence, failing which the awarded amount shall carry 18% interest per annum till realization. <br /> <br /> The Complainant is directed to handover the defective A.C. immediately to the Opposite Parties, after receiving of the new one of the same brand and specification.<br /> <br /> The Complaint disposed of accordingly.