District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum

Dakshin Dinajpur, W. Bengal

(Old Sub-Jail Municipal Market Complex, 2^nd Floor, Balurghat Dakshin Dinajpur Pin - 733101)

Telefax: (03522)-270013

Present          

Shri Sambhunath Chatterjee              - President

Miss. Swapna Saha                            - Member

Shri S. Ganguli                                    - Member

Consumer Complaint No. 52/2014

Sri Nirmallya Choudhury,

S/o Sri Narayan Choudhury

Vill.: Dakshin Khanpur

P.O.: Amritakhanda, P.S.: Balurghat,

Dist. Dakshin Dinajpur                                    ………Complainant

V-E-R-S-U-S

1.   The Proprietor,

      M/s. Payal, Lenin Sarani, PO & PS: Balurghat

      Dist. Dakshin Dinajpur- 733124               

2.   The Godrej & Boyee Mfg. Co. Ltd.,

      Pirojshanagar, Vikhroli (West),

      Mumbai- 400 079             

For complainant          …………- Shri Bidyut Kr. Roy, Ld. Adv. &                

                                                   - Shri Avijit Roy, Ld. Adv.   

For OP Nos. 1 & 2      ………… - Shri Debasish Chakraborty, Ld. Adv. &  

Date of Filing                                       : 08.12.2014

Date of Disposal                                 : 10.07.2015

                                                                                                Contd…P/2

Judgment & Order  dt. 10.07.2015

            Briefly stated facts of the case that the complainant purchased a refrigerator from the OP-1 on 19.3.2008. After purchased within a short period of time the original colour of the body became fade which appeared to be manufacturing defect. The complainant reported the matter to the OP No.1 repeatedly but no action was taken. Since the refrigerator was purchased with a scheme of the Godrej Company to 10 Years Rust Protection Plan  which was covered during the warranty period and the complainant in order to avail the plan purchase the refrigerator and when he found that condition of warranty was flouted the complainant brought to notice of OP No.1 but the OP No.1 adopted a dilatory tactics to evade the period of warranty period.

            The complainant alleged that the OP No.1 due to negligent act and deficiency in rendering service the complainant suffered, loss and injury for which the complainant is entitled to get compensation from the OPs for causing harassment.

            Before institution of the case notice was served upon the OPs on 1.6.2012 and finally in the month of November, 2014 the OP No.1 expressed his inability to replace the refrigerator for which the complainant had no other alternative to file this case before this Forum.

            The OP Nos. 1 & 2 have contested the case by filing written statement whereby OPs denied all the material allegations of the complainant. It was specifically averred in the written statement that the dispute of the refrigerator is repairable but the complainant dishonestly claimed replacement of the refrigerator which was against the warranty policy. The OPs undertook to repair the refrigerator of the complainant. If the complainant accepts such proposal the OPs agreed to render assistance to the complainant for repairing of the refrigerator.

                                                                                                Contd…P/3

            On the basis of the pleadings of the respective parties following points are to be decided.

1. Is the case is maintainable ?
2. Was there any deficiency in service committed by the OPs?
3. Weather of complainant will be entitled to get the relief as prayed for?

DECISION WITH REASONS

Complainant in the petition stated that the painting of the colour of door of the refrigerator became fade and since there was a scheme for 10 Years Rust Protection Plan and on being attracted by the same plan the complainant purchased the refrigerator but when it was found that the colour of the door of the refrigerator was affected it was brought to notice of the OPs but it was not given any importance by the OPs. Ultimately with the lapse of several years i.e. refrigerator was purchased on 19.3.2008 and the case was filed on 8.12.2014 and the complainant all through these 6 years tried to ventilate his grievance for fulfillment of the condition stipulated in the said scheme but baffled to have his relief the complainant had to file this case.  In order to substantiate his claim all documents have been filed but the OPs have not denied regarding the purchase of the refrigerator from the OP No.1.

            So far as the point raised by the complainant regarding the said defect covered under within the warranty period which has been disputed by the OPs. It was stated by the Ld. Lawyer for the OPs that the dispute made by the complainant is repairable and the OPs agreed to repair the said defect. But it was vehemently opposed by the OPs that warranty does not include the fading of the colour of the door of the refrigerator, if necessary order is made by this Forum regarding the painting of the door of the refrigerator by means of repairing the same with the technical assistance the OPs are duty bound to perform the same.

                                                                                                Contd…P/4

            Considering the submission of the respective parties it appears that the complainant purchased the refrigerator from the OPs and defect

as mentioned by the complainant was of fading of colour of the door of the refrigerator and on scrutiny of the warranty it appears that the period of 5 years was given in the warranty towards the compressor which is vital component of a refrigerator, the Ld. Lawyer of the complainant during argument admitted that there was no defect in the compressor and the refrigerator is running in normal way. Having regard to the said fact since the fading of the colour of the refrigerator does not come within the  coverage of warranty and whenever the OPs have agreed to repair the said defect which is a repairable one therefore, we hold that the OPs should be given an opportunity to remove the said defect.

            Considering all these aspects we hold that the case is maintainable and points as mentioned above are disposed of in favour of complainant in part.

            Hence, it is

O R D E R E D

            that the case is allowed on contest in part against the OPs. OPs are directed to repair the colour of the door and body of the refrigerator within 60 days from this day failing which the OPs will have to pay Rs. 2,000/- to the complainant and on failure to comply the same the complainant can realize the amount from the OPs after the expiry of the 60 days and complainant will also get the interest @ 8% p.a. till the realization of the said amount.

                                                                                                Contd…P/5

            Let plain copies of this order be furnished to the parties forthwith free of cost.

            Dictated & corrected

            ………Sd/-….…….                                                    

            (Sambhunath Chatterjee)                                                      

                    President                                                            

            We concur,

            ……Sd/-..……                                                            ………Sd/-……..

              (S. Saha)                                                         (S. Ganguli)                       

               Member                                                               Member

1. Date when free copy was issued                         ……………………
2. Date of application for certified copy       ……………………
3. Date when copy was made ready            ……………………
4. Date of delivery                                        ……………………

FREE COPY [Reg. 18(6)]

1. Mode of dispatch                                ……………………
2. Date of dispatch                                  ……………………

-x-