Haryana

Yamunanagar

CC/374/2014

Gian Chand S/o.Ishar Das - Complainant(s)

Versus

Tilak Raj Aneja - Opp.Party(s)

Ajay Mehta

18 Aug 2015

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, YAMUNA NAGAR

 

                                                                                                Complaint No..374 of 2014.

                                                                                                Date of institution: 4.9.2014

                                                                                                Date of decision: 18.8.2015.

 

Gian Chand Gulati son of late Sh. Ishwar Dass, resident of House No. 253, Ward No. 10, City Centre Road, Yamuna Nagar, Tehsil Jagadhri, District Yamuna Nagar.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         …Complainant.

                                                       Versus

 

Tilak Raj Aneja Fridge Mechanic, House No. 69, Thapar Colony, Near Wine Shop, Yamuna Nagar, Tehsil Jagadhri, District Yamuna Nagar.

 

                                                                                                                                                    …Opposite party.

 

BEFORE          SH. ASHOK KUMAR GARG, PRESIDENT,

                        SH. S.C. SHARMA, MEMBER.

 

Present:  Sh. Gian Chand complainant in person.

               OP ex-parte.

1.                     Complainant Sh. Gian Chand has filed the present complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 praying to direct the respondent (hereinafter referred as OP) to install new compressor of whirlpool, Godrej company in his fridge and to pay compensation of Rs. 50000/- for mental agony suffered by him including litigation expenses. 

2.                     Brief facts of the complaint, as alleged by the complainant are that the complainant is a senior citizen and has an old fridge which was working properly but suddenly in the month of June, 2013 its compressor was burnt. The complainant visited the shop of OP and narrated the facts to him who told that there is a compressor of good quality in his shop which will cost Rs. 3500/- (including labour charges). He verbally told that the aforesaid compressor shall any guarantee of one year and Rs. 500/- will be paid for old compressor and as such the complainant will have to pay Rs. 3000/- for installation of new compressor. On the assurance of OP, the complainant handed over the old compressor as well as Rs. 3000/- to OP and asked him to install new compressor. Accordingly, on 30.6.2013, the OP visited his house and installed the new compressor in the fridge which became operative. The complainant was also assured of its proper functioning. The bill for the new compressor was not issued by OP by saying that there is no need of the same as he is always available in case of any fault in it. However, the new compressor installed by the OP stopped functioning on 1.7.2013 and he was informed accordingly. On 3.8.2013, the OP visited his house and replaced the new compressor in question with old one and took the new compressor with him. The old compressor installed by OP in place of new compressor did not work properly and the same is lying dead till date. The OP was informed several times on telephone but he kept on putting off the matter on one pretext or the other. The complainant has thus, suffered a lot due to defective compressor and as such he is entitled to a compensation of Rs. 50,000/- for the loss suffered by him besides cost of litigation.  Hence, this complaint.

3.                     Upon notice, OP refused to receive summon from the process server and as such he was proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 6.5.2015.

4.                     To prove his case, the complainant tendered in evidence his affidavit as Annexure CW/A and closed his evidence.

5.                             We have heard the complainant and have gone through the pleadings as well as affidavit placed on the file very carefully and minutely.

6.                     The main plea taken by the complainant is that he has an old fridge which was working properly but suddenly in the month of June, 2013 its compressor was burnt and the OP installed new compressor in his old refrigerator on 30.6.2013 and charged a sum of Rs. 3000/- by reducing Rs. 500/- out of Rs. 3500/- on account of old compressor. The new compressor installed in the refrigerator of complainant became defective after a few days and the same was replaced with old one. The replaced old compressor sometimes remains in working order and automatically it becomes out of order.  However, the complainant has not submitted any bill or any mechanic report from which it could be established that fridge in question was not working properly and automatically it becomes out of order. Even the complainant failed to file any receipt regarding charges of Rs. 3000/- for replacing the compressor with new one. But on the other hand, OP failed to appear and defend the case despite notice of this complaint. The version of the complainant is duly supported by his affidavit which goes unrebutted. Moreover, the complainant is a senior citizen who is being harassed by the OP and we have no option except to allow the present complaint as we have no reason to disbelieve the version of the complainant supported by affidavit. The complainant has specifically mentioned in his complaint that compressor installed by the Op it out of order and as such it is a clear cut deficiency in service on the part of OP and unfair trade practice on behalf of OP.

7.                     In view of the facts and circumstances noted above and in the interest of justice, we partly allow the complaint of complainant and direct the OP to repair or replace the compressor of the refrigerator of the complainant free of costs and to make it in working condition to the satisfaction of the complainant. The complaint is decided accordingly. The order be complied within 30 days from the date of order failing which the complainant shall be entitled to invoke the jurisdiction of this Forum as per rules.  Copies of this order be sent to the parties concerned free of costs as per rules. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Announced in open court: 18.8.2015.

                                               

                                                                                    (ASHOK KUMAR GARG)

                                                                                    PRESIDENT

 

 

 

                                                                                    (S.C.SHARMA,)

                                                                                    MEMBER.