Haryana

Kurukshetra

146/2018

Palvinder Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Unique Radious - Opp.Party(s)

20 Aug 2019

ORDER

 

BEFORE THE  DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPTUES REDRESSAL FORUM, KURUKSHETRA.

 

Consumer Complaint no. 146 of 2018.

Date of instt. 13.7.2018. 

                                                                        Date of Decision: 20.08.2019.

 

Palvinder Singh, aged 48 years son of Gurnek Singh, resident of H. No.430/3, Khatapur Mohalla, Thanesar, Distt. Kurukshetra.

 

                                                                ……….Complainant.      

                        Versus

 

1. Unique Radios, Krishana Gate, Kurukshetra, through its Proprietor, Mob. No.9466421046.

 

2. Vestar. Eltech Appliances Pvt. Ltd. 221, Ist Floor, Phase III, Okhala Industrial Estate, New Delhi- 110020, through its Managing Director.

 

..………Opposite parties.

 

       Complaint under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act.            

 

Before       Smt. Neelam Kashyap, President.    

                Ms. Neelam, Member. 

                Sh. Sunil Mohan Trikha, Member                                          

Present:     Sh. Om Parkash Ladwa, Advocate for complainant.        

 Sh. Pankaj Parmar, Advocate for opposite party no.1.

 Opposite party no.2 exparte.

 

           

ORDER

                                                                         

                    This is a complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 moved by complainant Palvinder Singh against Unique Radios and another, the opposite parties.

2.             It is stated in the complaint that complainant purchased a Vestar split Air Conditioner from op no.1 vide No. URI 509 dated 6.3.2018 for a sum of Rs.35,900/- with warranty of one year. It is alleged that   from the very beginning, the said air conditioner was not in proper functioning condition and there is manufacturing defect in the same. Thereafter, the complainant visited the service station of op no.1 and complained about the defect but the ops have failed to get removed the defect in the air conditioner despite several requests. There is great deficiency in service on the parts of ops and the complainant has suffered mental agony and harassment as well as financial loss. Hence, this complaint.

3.             On notice, op no.1 appeared and filed written statement asserting therein that in fact, said air conditioner which was purchased by complainant from answering op was received by answering op in a sealed box from the distributor of op no.2 which is manufacturing company and the time of sale, said AC was also lying in a sealed box. The complainant has also read over the whole terms and conditions regarding the warranty/ claim of the said AC which are mentioned in the concerned bill. The op no.2 company has also mentioned its toll free numbers over the warrantee card to contact it directly if any defect is found in the air conditioner. Only manufacturing company is liable to give the whole services/claims with its terms and conditions to the purchaser. If the complainant is found entitled to get any such claims/ compensation, then op no.2 is liable to pay the same. With these averments, dismissal of complaint prayed for.

4.             Opposite party no.2 did not appear despite notice and was proceeded against exparte.

5.             The complainant produced his affidavit Ex.CW1/A and documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C3 and closed his evidence. Learned counsel for Op No.1 has tendered into evidence Affidavit Ex. RW1/A and closed his evidence.

4.             We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have perused the case file carefully.

5.             The complainant in order to prove his case has furnished his affidavit Ex.CW1/A in which he has reiterated all the averments made in his complaint. He has also placed on file copy of bill Ex.C1 from which it is evident that complainant purchased the air conditioner from op no.1 for a sum of Rs.35,900/- on 6.3.2018. The complainant has also placed on file copy of message sent to the company regarding complaint in air conditioner in question. But the ops have failed to redress the grievance of the complainant despite his several requests. The op no.2 which is manufacturing company has failed to appear before the Forum rather opted to be proceeded against exparte. The air conditioner in question was purchased by complainant on 6.3.2018 and has filed the present complaint on 13.7.2018 i.e. just within four months of purchase of air conditioner. Therefore, it is proved on record that air conditioner is having defect from the very beginning due to which complainant could not take benefit of AC in question and as such there is deficiency in service on the part of ops and the complainant is entitled to refund of the amount of air conditioner in question from the ops.

6.             In view of the above, we allow the present complaint and direct the opposite parties to refund the amount of Rs.39,500/- i.e. price of the air conditioner in question to the complainant within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order, failing which the complainant will be entitled to interest @9% per annum from the date of order till actual payment and the complainant will be at liberty to initiate proceedings  under Section 25/27 of the Act against the Ops. The ops will be entitled to receive air conditioner from complainant against proper receipt. A copy of this order be supplied to the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room.

 

Announced in open Forum:

Dt.: 20.08.2019.                                                  (Neelam Kashyap)

                                                                        President.

 

 

(Sunil Mohan Trikha),           (Neelam)       

Member                             Member.