By Sri.  Mohamed Ismayil C.V., Member.

The grievance of the complainant is as follows:-

1.         On 12/10/2023, the complainant had purchased a refrigerator model LG REF D 201APZU refrigerator from the shop of the first opposite party for an amount of Rs.16,900/- . The refrigerator was manufactured by the second opposite party.  It is alleged by the complainant that after 7 days of its usage ice was formed fully inside the refrigerator and the complainant had faced difficulty to keep articles inside the refrigerator.  Moreover water was oozed out through the beading of the door. On 21/10/2023 the complainant had contacted the first opposite party, consequently the technician of the second opposite party examined the product and reported that there is defects in the freezer of the refrigerator and he made temporary arrangement for its functioning. But defect was continued that refrigerator was always packed with frozen ice and water was oozing out at the time of power off.  The complainant contacted the first opposite party and the technician of the second opposite party had again examined the refrigerator and repeated that there was defect to the freezer of the refrigerator. It is alleged by the complainant that defect of the refrigerator was continued resulting mental agony and inconvenience to the complainant. The complainant reported the complaint for a third time but no action was taken from the side of the opposite parties. The complainant had repeatedly contacted the opposite parties but the opposite parties did not address the grievance of the complainant. The opposite parties are liable to replace the defective refrigerator with a new one or refund the price of the refrigerator. The complainant prayed for direction to the opposite parties to pay compensation of Rs. 50,000/- for the sufferings of financial loss, time loss and mental agony.

2.         The complaint is admitted on file and issued notice to the opposite parties. The first opposite party received notice on 25/01/2024. The second opposite party received notice on 29/01/2024.But the opposite parties turned down and did not file version. So the Commission set the opposite parties as exparte.  The Commission proceeded to matter with the evidence of the complainant.

3.         The complainant filed affidavit in lieu of evidence. The documents from the side of the complainant is marked as Ext. A1 to A3 documents.  Ext. A1 document is the copy of communication issued by the second opposite party to the complainant.  Ext. A2 document is the copy of tax invoice dated 12/10/2023 issued by the first opposite party to the complainant. Ext.A3 document is the copy of warranty card of the refrigerator.

4.         Heard the complainant in detail. Perused affidavit and documents of the complainant.The Commission considered following points to adjudicate the matter:-

1. Whether the acts of the opposite parties are amounted to deficiency in service?
2. Relief and cost?

5.         Point No.(i) &(ii)

The Commission is considering both points together for the convenience of analysis of evidence as they are related to each other. The complainant has argued that as per Ext. A2 document she had purchased a refrigerator from the first opposite party for Rs. 16,900/- . But after a week of time the refrigerator became defective. It is alleged by the complainant that after 7 days of its usage ice was formed fully inside the refrigerator and the complainant was faced difficulty to keep articles inside the refrigerator.  Moreover water was oozed out through the beading of the door. So the complainant has argued that the product suffers manufacturing defect. It is argued that the complainant had contacted the opposite parties repeatedly to rectify the defects of the refrigerator, but no action was taken by them. Moreover the technician of the second opposite party admitted that there was defect to the freezer of the refrigerator. The defect was suffered within the period of warranty. The complainant has produced Ext. A3 document to prove the period of warranty.  Ext. A1 document produced by the complainant would show that the refrigerator had sustained defect. There is no contra evidence available before the Commission to rebut the pleadings of the complainant. Moreover the Commission find that defect was occurred within a short span of time from the date of purchase. The evidence of the complainant would also show that the complaints of the refrigerator were frequently occurred, but the opposite parties could not rectify the defect.

6.         In the evaluation of evidence availed before the Commission it can be find that the complainant had reported defect of the refrigerator on many occasions before the opposite parties, but no proper action was taken by the opposite parties to resolve the issue. The narration of defect pointed out manufacturing defect of the product.  So the opposite parties are liable to replace the refrigerator with a new one or if the same model is not available in the market the opposite parties are liable to refund the cost of the refrigerator to the complainant. The Commission find that the acts of the opposite parties  have caused mental agony and inconvenience to the complainant . So they are liable to pay a compensation of Rs. 10,000/- to the complainant. Moreover the opposite parties are also liable to pay cost of the proceedings as Rs. 3,000/- to the complainant. 

7.         In the light of the discussions made above the Commission find that the opposite parties are jointly and severally liable for the acts of deficiency in service committed towards the complainant. So the complaint is allowed in the following manner:-

1.  The opposite parties are directed to replace the defective refrigerator with a new one in the same model as shown in Ext. A2 document. If the model shown in Ext. A2 is not available in the market, the opposite parties are directed to refund Rs. 16,900/- (Rupees sixteen thousand nine hundred only) to the complainant. The opposite parties are directed to take back the defective refrigerator from the complainant after bearing its cost of transportation and packing by them. 
2. The opposite parties are directed to pay Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) to the complainant as compensation for the act of deficiency in service committed towards the complainant.
3. The opposite parties are directed to pay Rs. 3,000/- (Rupees three thousand only) to the complainant as cost of the proceedings.

The opposite party shall comply this order within 30 days from the date of this order otherwise  entire amount shall carry interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of this order till date of realisation.

Dated this 29^th  day of  April  2024.

MOHANDASAN.K, PRESIDENT

                                                   PREETHI SIVARAMAN.C, MEMBER

         MOHAMED ISMAYIL.C.V, MEMBER

APPENDIX

Witness examined on the side of the complainant: Nil

Documents marked on the side of the complainant: Ext.A1 to A3

Ext.A1 : Copy of communication issued by the second opposite party to the

              complainant.

Ext.A2 : Copy of tax invoice dated 12/10/2023 issued by the first opposite party to the

               complainant.

Ext A3 : Copy of warranty card of the refrigerator.

Witness examined on the side of the opposite party: Nil

Documents marked on the side of the opposite party: Nil

Mohandasan . K, President

     Preethi Sivaraman.C, Member

     Mohamed Ismayil.C.V, Member