Sri Shyamal Gupta, Member

This Appeal has been filed against the Order dated 19-01-2017 passed by the Ld. District Forum, Kolakta-III (South) in CC/240/2016.  By such order, the instant complaint case was dismissed.

The Appellant purchased one refrigerator from the Respondent No. 3 on 19-02-2010.  As he faced problem with the cooling system of the refrigerator, a complaint was lodged on 12-05-2011.  The refrigerator was repaired against payment of a sum of Rs. 1,980/-.  As the Complainant still experienced problem with the refrigerator, so another complaint was lodged in the month of September, 2012.  The authorized Service Centre of the Respondents demanded Rs. 500/- as inspection charge.  As the problem occurred during the warranty period, the Appellant requested it to provide free service which fell in deaf ears.  Since 03-01-2013, the Refrigerator became totally non-functional.  Although he made several correspondences with concerned parties, it did not yield any positive result. Therefore, the complaint case was filed.

The Respondent Nos. 1&2, on the other hand, submitted that its refrigerator comes with 1+4 year warranty from the date of purchase that comprises of 1 year warranty on all parts  and thereafter 4 years additional warranty only in respect of the compressor of the refrigerator.  These OPs denied that the refrigerator is suffering from any sort of manufacturing defect. They claimed that due service was always rendered to the Appellant.

The Respondent No. 3 submitted that as a dealer, it cannot be held liable for non-rendering of proper after-sales-service or alleged manufacturing defect of the refrigerator.

Decision with reasons

Respondent Nos. 1&2 did not remain present at the time of hearing though they initially appeared through their Ld. Advocate.  Therefore, we heard the Ld. Advocates for the Appellant and Respondent No. 3 at the time of hearing.  We have also gone through the documents on record.

It appears from the details narrated in the petition of complaint that first official complaint in respect of the refrigerator was made on 12-05-2011.  Thereafter, second complaint was lodged on 24-09-2012. 

It is though alleged that the Appellant sent several complainant letters to the  Respondents after the refrigerator became totally defunct w.e.f. 03-01-2013, save and except filing the copy of a complaint letter dated 10-09-2014, copy of no other complaint letter is adduced.

Be that as it may, it is though alleged by the Appellant that the refrigerator is a defective one, he made no sincere effort to establish that the refrigerator is indeed suffering from some sort of manufacturing defect through an independent expert.

That apart, in case the refrigerator was indeed beset with any sort of inherent problem, it was most unlikely that the Appellant would lodge complaints at such infrequent intervals.

Fact of the matter remains that, post expiry of warranty period, the Appellant is duty bound to pay all charges.  It is though alleged by the Appellant that since October, 2012 to October, 2014, the Respondents did not attend to his complaints, it appears that, as the Appellant refused to pay requisite charges, the Respondents did not depute their service engineer to attend to the complaints of the Appellant. 

In all, we find no substance in the complaint of the Appellant. Accordingly, we refrain from interfering with the impugned order in any manner whatsoever.  The Appeal stands dismissed. No costs.