D.O.F:13/01/2020
D.O.O:15/03/2023
IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KASARAGOD
CC.No.9/2020
Dated this, the 15th day of March 2023
PRESENT:
SRI.KRISHNAN.K :PRESIDENT
SRI.RADHAKRISHNAN NAIR.M : MEMBER
SMT.BEENA.K.G : MEMBER
- Sam Joseph,
S/o late V.J.samuel,: Complainant
Residing at Nadiviledathu House,: (Dead)
Koyakundu, Balla Post,
Hosdurg Taluk
- Mercy.T.J
W/o Late Sam Joseph,
R/at Nadiviledath House,
Koyakundu, Balla P.O,
Hosdurg, Kasaragod
- Albin.J.Sam,
S/o Late Sam Joseph,
R/at Nadiviledath House,
Koyakundu, Balla P.O,
Hosdurg, Kasaragod
- Amal.J.Sam
S/o Late Sam Joseph,
R/at Nadiviledath House,
Koyakundu, Balla P.O,
Hosdurg, Kasaragod
- Athul.J.Sam
S/o Late Sam Joseph,
R/at Nadiviledath House,
Koyakundu, Balla P.O,
Hosdurg, Kasaragod
(Adv. K.RamaPattali for Complainant 2 to 5)
- The secretary
The Kasaragod Subsidiary,
Central Police of Kerala,
Branch Kasaragod- 671 123
- The Manager,
The Kasaragod Subsidiary,: Opposite Parties
Central Police of Kerala,
Branch Kasaragod- 671 123
- The Head,
Consumer Care Cell,
Whirlpool of India Ltd.,
28, N.I.T,
Faridabad- 121 001,
Haryana
(Adv. K.S. Arundas&Annamma John)
ORDER
SRI.KRISHNAN.K :PRESIDENT
The complainant is working as sub inspector of police at Bekal Police Station. He is holding the card issued by central police station. He purchased a whirlpool washing machine on 07/07/2019 by paying Rs. 24, 414.86/-
When he purchased the product, Opposite Party claimed its quality and performance to the satisfaction of the consumer.
But he could not wash his cloths from the washing machine aforesaid. Representatives were informed by toll free numbers. Opposite Party sent a team to complainant with an effort to set machine functioning but it was in vain. On 03/10/2019 written complaint is given but no reply. Due to defect and deficiency in service, complainant suffered economic loss, hence complainant seeks refund of price of washing machine and compensation.
The Opposite Party No.1 and 2 filed its written version. They denied any deficiency in service. They are only sales outlet. For manufacturing defect, they are not liable for reliefs claimed in the case.
The Opposite Party no.3 filed written version allegation of manufacturing defect is denied. On receipt of complaint machine is inspected its functioning and found that there is no sufficient water pressure and advised to increase the height of water tank or fix a pressure pump and ruled out any manufacturing defect to the machine. They are ready to attend to any service at any time and prayed for dismissal of complaint.
In the meanwhile original complainant died. Legal heirs are impleaded in the case. Complainant filed IA 64/2021 for inspection of technical expert. Expert commissioner filed report on 16/08/2021. Report shows that PCB board of machine was faculty and it is not working properly.
Supplemental complainant No.2 filed chief affidavit and was cross examined as Pw1. Ext.A1 to A7 and Ext.C1 marked. The Opposite Party No.3 also filed chief affidavit no document is produced.
As per rival contentions, following points arise for consideration in the case.
- Whether there is any manufacturing defect to the washing machine and whether complainant is entitled to get it replaced or refund of its price?
- Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of Opposite Party in the matter of repair of washing machine and if so whether complainant is entitled to any compensation, if so for what reliefs?
All the points discussed together for convenience. The complainant purchased the washing machine from Opposite Party No.1 and Opposite party No.2. Manufacture is Opposite Party No.3. Ext.A1 shows product details and warranty. Ext.A4 dated 14/10/2019 letter issued by complainant to Opposite Party shows that machine is not working properly and that a team of technicians came to inspected it. But no solution is found. No reply is sent to the notice.
Either in the complaint or in the affidavit, there is no mention specifically what is the Manufacturing defect to the machine and which part of the machine is defective. Ext.C1 report also does not show any mention about manufacturing defect. Expert is not examined to prove report. Report specifically mention PCB board of machine is faulty, certified machine is not working properly.
Report is also silent about manufacturing defect. Since there is no manufacturing defect complainant is not entitled to refund of its price or replacement of washing machine. Point No.1 is found against complainant.
But complainant No.1 report shows that PCB is faulty and hence it is to be replaced free of cost and machine is to service to work it properly. There is thus Deficiency in service of Opposite Party. The complainant is also entitled to compensation for deficiency in service in the case, inspection of unit is on 11/08/2021 till date its PCB Board is not replaced. Machine is found not working properly. Except that no details are available. In truth even report shows that machine is working only thing it is not working properly since PCB board is faulty.
So in the circumstances Opposite Party is liable to replace the faulty PCB board free of cost, send its technical staff and service the machine to see that it is working properly. For deficiency in service complainant is entitled for compensation. A sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) found reasonable. The Complainant is also entitled for cost of litigation fixed as 5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only)
In the result complainant is partly allowed Opposite Party No.1 to Opposite Party No.3 are directed to replace PCB board of washing machine free of cost and send a technical staff to attend its service to make washing machine to work it properly. In default there of complainant are entitled for an amount of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten thousand only) being the cost of the PCB Board and service. Further Opposite Party No.1 to Opposite Party No.3 are jointly and severally liable to pay Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) for deficiency in service and pay Rs.5000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only) as cost of the litigation with 30 days of the receipt of the order.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
Exhibits
A1: Product details and warranty
A2: Duplicate Bill
A3: Letter from complainant
A4: Letter issued by complainant dated 14/10/2019
A5 & A6 – Acknowledgment Card
A7- Endorsement
C1: Inspection Report
Witness Examined
Pw1- Albin J Sam
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
Forwarded by Order
Ps/ Assistant Registrar
