The Complainant has filed this case alleging deficiency-in-service by the O.P, where O.P is the Proprietor, Rohit Sales & Service, Vivekananda Marg, Chidiapool, Balasore.
1. Factual matrix of the dispute is that the Complainant has purchased one “Godrej Split AC-GSC18FG8MOG (Indoor-Outdoor) on 27.05.2015 from the O.P on payment of Rs.41,500/- vide Invoice No.RSS/15-16/761 with Seven years warranty on compressor and one year warranty on all other parts. But, after installation of said AC, defects are seen after a few days, thereby the Complainant lodged a complaint before the O.P for repair of the same. Accordingly, the O.P has also repaired the said AC of the Complainant as per repeated request made by him. On 01.05.2016, the aforesaid AC became totally defective, thus the Complainant lodged complaint before the O.P either for complete repair or for replacement with a new one, but the O.P did not pay any heed to it. The Complainant served Advocate notice on 09.05.2016 through Regd. post with AD requesting the O.P to replace the said AC with a new one within three days of notice, but the O.P had not taken any step yet. Prayer for replacement of the damaged and defective AC with a new one along with compensation towards physical and mental sufferings.
2. Written version filed by the O.P through his Advocate, where he has denied about maintainability as well as its cause of action. The O.P has further submitted that the O.P time and again attended the complaint lodged by the Complainant for eradication of the defect in the above said AC, which is very trivial in nature. The defects of split AC reoccurred due to wrong handling by the Complainant. Moreover, the O.P fairly undertake to replace the same by a new one and the assurance of the O.P though conveyed to the Complainant, but the Complainant is adamant to get the compensation from the O.P, which is deprecated and arbitrary one. But, the O.P remained absent at the time of hearing and did not take part in hearing also.
3. In view of the above averments of both the Parties, the points for determinations of this case are as follows:-
(i) Whether this Consumer case is maintainable as per Law.
(ii) Whether there is any cause of action to file this case.
(iii) To what relief the Complainant is entitled for ?
4. In order to substantiate his plea, the Complainant has filed certain documents like Xerox copy of Retail invoice, warranty card and copy of Advocate notice issued to the O.P in support of his claim, but the O.P has not filed any documents in his support. Perused the same. It has been argued on behalf of the Advocate for the Complainant that after purchase the alleged Godrej Split AC for Rs.41,500/- having warranty of 7 years on compressor and 1 year on all other parts. The said AC found to be defective in running condition, for which he lodged complaint before the O.P and the O.P repaired the same AC with too late. The defect was again and again. On 01.05.2016, the AC was totally damaged, but the O.P did not take any step to replace the same with a new one. The Complainant issued an Advocate notice to the O.P for replacement of the alleged AC with a new one, but the O.P remained silent, for which he filed this case praying for replacement of the said AC with a new one along with compensation. On the other hand, though O.P did not take part in hearing as mentioned earlier, his written version clearly discloses that he is ready and undertakes to replace the said AC with a new one. If the facts remain so, why the case is lingering and comes to a contesting stage. The O.P has already received the Advocate notice and also remained silent without complying the demand of the Complainant, for which the Complainant has been compelled to approach this Forum.
5. So in this circumstances, on careful consideration of all the materials available in the case record, this Forum is in opinion that this case is maintainable and there is cause of action to file this case, for which the Complainant is entitled to get a new AC by replacement of the old one with compensation of Rs.1,000/-, which will meet ends of justice in this case. Hence, Ordered:-
O R D E R
The Consumer case is allowed on contest against the O.P with cost. The O.P is directed to replace the alleged AC of the Complainant with a new one and to pay compensation of Rs.1,000/- to the Complainant within 30 days from the date of receiving of this Order, failing which it will carry interest @ 9% per annum from the date of order till realization. The Complainant is also at liberty to realize the same from the O.P as per Law, in case of failure by the O.P to comply the Order.
Pronounced in the open Forum on this day i.e. the 11th day of July, 2017 given under my Signature & Seal of the Forum.
