Karnataka

Kolar

CC/35/2018

M.Chandrakanth - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Proprietor, SS Distributors - Opp.Party(s)

21 Jun 2018

ORDER

Date of Filing: 02/04/2018

Date of Order: 21/06/2018

BEFORE THE KOLAR DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, D.C. OFFICE PREMISES, KOLAR.

 

Dated: 21^st DAY OF JUNE 2018

PRESENT

SRI. K.N. LAKSHMINARAYANA, B.Sc., LLB., PRESIDENT

SMT. A.C. LALITHA, BAL, LLB.,  ……  LADY MEMBER

 

CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO. 35 OF 2018

Sri. M. Chandrakanth,

No.4340, SWETHA NILAYA,

3^rd Main, 5^th Cross,

Amaravathi Nagar, Deshishalli Post,

Bangarpet-563 162,

Kolar District.                                                                    ….  COMPLAINANT.

(In-person)

 

- V/s –

1) M/s. S.S. Distributors (LG Distributions of

Show Room), 1^st Cross Road, Robertsonpet

PIN-563122, KGF.

(Exparte)

 

2) The Proprietor, M/s. Sudarshan Distributors,

Geetha Road, Robertsonpet, KGF-563122.

(Exparte)

 

3) M/s. L.G. Electronics India Private Limited,

A-Wing (3^rd Floor), D-3, District Centre, Saket,

New Delhi-110017

(Exparte)                                                            …. OPPOSITE PARTIES.

 

-: ORDER:-

BY SRI. K.N. LAKSHMINARAYANA, PRESIDENT,

01.   The complainant has filed this complaint against the opposite parties seeking directions to refund Rs.18,900/- towards defective Water Purifier supplied by the OPs, Rs.10,000/- towards legal expenses, Rs.5,000/- towards cost of drinking water purchased from outside, Rs.15,000/- towards Loss of pay for availing leave to attend the court proceedings, Rs.1,100/- towards Miscellaneous expenses and Rs.25,000/- towards other incidental charges.  In all Rs.75,000/- from the Ops.

 

02.   The brief facts of the complainant’s case is that, on 20.06.2017 he purchased one LG Water Purifier – WAW35RW2RP vide invoice No.433 by making payment of Rs.18,900/- from OP No.1 under Warranty of 01 year from the date of its purchase bearing Sl. No. 702NPMH001851.  In the 1^st week of July-2017 the same was installed in the residential address of the complainant.  After lapse of 05 months the said water purifier developed lot of problems and the same was complained to Mr. Suresh Kumar, Proprietor, i.e., OP No.1on 12.12.2017 vide complaint No. RNP-171209070730 and on 19.12.2017 vide complaint No.RNP171219081506.  On 29.12.2017 service engineer visited and informed that, the problem is due to motor and same was replaced.  Thereafter the said equipment performed 15 days only and it stopped working.  Again on 23.01.2018 the complainant complained the same to OP No.1 vide complaint No. RNP 180123091317 and also made several phone calls and OP No.1 stated that, due to supply of hard water at Bangarpet no service personal is willing to attend.  The complainant also contacted OP No.2 who is a sister-concern of OP No.1, but all went in vain and made his life miserable.  The complainant being an employee of Central PSU BEML Ltd., has spent his hard earned money towards purchase of the said water purifier but due to the persisting problems raised in the water filter he had frustrated.

 

(a)    Furthermore the complainant has contended that, as per the terms and conditions mentioned in the warranty card nobody had visited and no such electrolysis sterilization was done and no candles were replaced, nothing has been done after installation of the said Water Filter as per the warranty booklet.  The OP No.1 is the dealer, OP No.2 is the sister concern of OP No.1 and OP No.3 is the manufacturer of LG Water purifier.  Hence this complaint.

 

03.   The Ops in spite of service of notice they have not appeared before this forum and OP Nos.1 to 3 were placed exparte. 

 

04.   On 05.06.2018 the complainant has filed his affidavit evidence by way of examination-in-chief and on 14.06.2018 he has also filed his written arguments.

 

05.   Now the points that do arise for our consideration are that:-

POINT NO.1:-   Whether the complainant has proved deficiency in service on the part of OP Nos.1 to 3?

 

POINT NO.2:- Whether the complainant is entitled for the reliefs as prayed by him?

 

POINT NO.3:-   What order?

 

06.   Our findings on the above points are that:-

POINT NOs.1 & 2:-  Are in the Affirmative as against

OP Nos.1 & 3.

 

POINT NO.3:-   As per the final order

                                        for the following:-

 

REASONS

07.   POINT NOS.1 & 2:-  These points are taken up together for discussion to avoid the repetition of facts.  On perusal of the complaint, documents and the evidence of the complainant, it is a fact that, the complainant has purchased one LG Water Purifier from OP No.1 on 20.06.2017 by paying Rs.18,900/- vide invoice No.433.  The period of warranty is 01 year from the date of its purchase.  The said LG water purifier was installed in the 1^st week of July-2017 at the residence of the complainant.  The complainant has also produced the copy of tax invoice and copy of the warranty card and after lapse of 05 months from the date of its purchase the said water purifier started giving problems and the complainant has complained the same to OP No.1 on 12.12.2017 and on 19.12.2017.  On 29.12.2017 the Service Engineer visited and informed that, the problem is due to motor and the same was replaced and within 15 days the said LG water purifier stopped working.

 

08.   On 23.01.2018 the complainant complained the same to OP No.1 and also made several phone calls and thereafter the OP No.1 stated that, due to the supply of hard water at Bangarpet no service personal will attend.  Further as per the conditions of the warranty card, the OP No.1 has to give 03 free services in which complete electrolysis sterilization shall be done and out-sediment pre-filter candles shall be replaced at each visit.  But the said visits were also not done by the OP No.1. 

 

09.   From the above said facts it clearly reveals that, there is a deficiency of service on the part of OP No.1 in not attending the complaints as per the terms and conditions of the warranty card.  The OP No.1 being the seller has completely failed to do its obligations in spite of several requests and phone calls made by the complainant and it reveals about deficiency of service and made the complainant to suffer mental agony and he is entitled for the compensation.  The Ops in spite of service of notice failed to contest the case, hence the allegations made in the complaint are unchallenged.  The complainant has not produced any document for claiming his expenses.

 

10.   OP No.1 is the seller and OP No.3 is a manufacturer of LG Water Purifier who are jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation.  The OP No.2 is the sister concern of OP No.1 and hence OP No.2 is no way concern to this proceedings and hence the case against OP No.2 is liable to be dismissed.  Hence under these circumstances as discussed above, we answered Point Nos.1 & 2 are in the Affirmative.

 

POINT No.3:-

11.   In view of our findings on Point Nos. 1 and 2 and the discussions made thereon, we proceed to pass the following:-

ORDER

01.   The complaint filed by the complainant is partly allowed with cost of Rs.3,000/- as against OP Nos.1 & 3.

 

02.   The case against OP No.2 is dismissed.

 

03.   The OP Nos.1 & 3 are hereby directed to pay Rs.18,900/- jointly and severally to the complainant subject to receiving of the defective LG Water Purifier – WAW35RW2RP from the complainant.

 

04.   The OP Nos.1 & 3 are hereby directed to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards compensation to the complainant.

 

05.   The OP Nos.1 & 3 are directed to comply the order within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order.

 

06.   Send a copy of this order to both parties free of cost.

(Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by him, corrected and then pronounced by us on this 21^st DAY OF JUNE 2018)

 

 

LADY MEMBER                                PRESIDENT