Delhi

North

RBT/CC/257/2022

GOVIND K SRIVASTAVA - Complainant(s)

Versus

VASU ELECTRONICS PVT LTD - Opp.Party(s)

18 Jan 2024

ORDER

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I (North District)

[Govt. of NCT of Delhi]

Ground Floor, Court Annexe -2 Building, Tis Hazari Court Complex, Delhi- 110054

 

RBT/CC No.: 257/2022

(DCDRC-V(NW) CC No.345/2018)

IN THE MATTER OF:

 

GOVIND K. SRIVASTAVA

 S/o LATE SH. S. N. SRIVASTAVA

R/O # 3/4/50, GOPI NATH BAZAR

DELHI CANTT. NEW DELHI-110 010                                           ………  COMPLAINANT

 

                                                         VERSUS

1. VASU ELECTRONICS PVT. LTD.

HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE

AT: A-2/17, SECTOR-3,

ROHINI, NEW DELHI

 

 2. MR. RAJ KUMAR BAWEJA

 A-2/17, SECTOR-3,

ROHINI NEW DELHI

 

3. MR. NITIN BAVEJA

A-2/17, SECTOR-3,

ROHINI NEW DELHI

 

4.VAAYU HOME APPLIANCES INDIA PVT. LTD.

HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT

3RD FLOOR, SURYA SADHNA BUILDING

A.B. ROAD, INDORE.

MADHYA PRADESH-452001                                                      ...OPPOSITE PARTIES

 

ORDER

18-01-24

 

Ashwani Kumar Mehta, Member:

 

1.       The facts, as alleged in the  present complaint filed under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986,  are that :-

 

1.  In the month of April, 2017, the complainant visited the opposite party No. 1, to purchase an Air Conditioners and the  opposite parties Nos.1 to 3 persuaded the complainant to buy an Air Cooler make 'Vayu India' (opposite party No.4) instead of normal AC as the said product was capable of giving cool air like an AC but consumes very less electricity like a normal cooler. Falling in their trap, the complainant purchased the said product and 2 such Air Coolers (1 of less capacity for Rs.26,500/- all inclusive and another of higher capacity for Rs.62,500/=(plus Rs.1,000 for misc. expenses) were so purchased. Total sum of Rs.90,000/= (Rupees Ninety Thousand only) was paid by way of a cheque for Rs.50,000/= (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) bearing No. 300048917421 drawn from Syndicate Bank, Delhi Cantt. Branch, New Delhi in the name of Mr. Nitin Beveja (opposite party No.3) and Rs.40,000/= (Rupees Forty Thousand only) in cash to the opposite party No.3. Copy of bank statement is annexed with the complaint as ANNEXURE C-1. However, only 1 receipt for Rs.26,500/- dated 07.04.2017 was provided out of the cash component of Rs.40,000/- towards the Air Cooler of lesser capacity, which was installed at complainant's son's (Saurabh Srivasatava) home in Gurugram, Haryana. The other bigger capacity Air Cooler was installed by the opposite parties Nos.1 to 3 at the complainant's House at 3/4/50, Gopi Nath Bazar, Delhi Cantt., New Delhi-110010. A copy of the Receipt dated 07.04.2017 (for lesser capacity air cooler) is annexed with the complaint as ANNEXURE C-2.

 

2. It has been alleged that when complainant asked for the receipt of the Air Cooler of bigger capacity (for Rs.62,500/-), the opposite party Nos. 2 & 3 at first hesitated in giving the bill/ receipt but when complainant insisted, the OP Nos. 2 & 3 assured the complainant that they will deliver the same at the  residence at Delhi Cantt. in a day or two after its installation. The Complainant reposed faith in the OP Nos. 1 to 3. Photographs of the faulty air cooler (bigger capacity) installed at complainant's home in Delhi Cantt. are annexed with the complaint as ANNEXURE C-3.

 

3. It has further been alleged that within two days of purchasing, the said Air Coolers were unable to perform properly. The bigger capacity Air Cooler in question was not cooling at all. Thereafter the complainant called the opposite party No.2, complaining about the faulty product and for receipt / bill to which the opposite party No.2 said that he will be sending some person to check the problem in the air cooler along with the receipt/ bill. The said person refilled the air cooler's gas and when complainant asked for the receipt / bill to which that person said that the receipt / bill was ready but he forgot to bring the same. When the complainant asked for the receipt of the air cooler, the Opposite Party No. 2 & 3 at first hesitated in giving the bill/ receipt but when the complainant insisted, they assured him that it will be delivered at complainant's residential address in a day or two. It has also been alleged that another serious problem was of current leakage in the air cooler. Many a times, the complainant & his family members have suffered electric shocks whenever they would accidently touched the air cooler. Same was also reported to the OPs, who always assured to attend the same but nothing was done.

 

4. Further, in the month of June, 2017, the complainant telephonically informed the Opposite Party No.2, that the air cooler in question has again stopped working, to which the Opposite Party No.2 asked the complainant to contact the manufacturer. The complainant thereafter, called the Opposite Party No.4 to remove the faults as the air cooler was in warranty period but the Opposite Party No.4 bluntly refused to come for a visit or to send anyone to attend the problem, as the complainant was not having the receipt/ bill of the said air cooler.  The complainant tried severally to contact the Opposite Party No.2 & 3 but on one pretext or the other, both dodged the complaint and also failed to provide the complainant with the receipt/ bill of the bigger air cooler. The complainant on 27.07.2017 also messaged on WhatsApp to the Opposite Party No.3 as he was not answering the phone calls to which the Opposite Party No.3, replied that he is out of station along with his family and asked the complainant to contact the Opposite Party No.2. And when the complainant again tried to contact the Opposite Party No.2, again he was not answering to his phone calls and all went in vain. After losing all hopes, finally on 10.08.2017 the complainant messaged on WhatsApp the Opposite Party No.2, stating that he will be filing a consumer complaint against him but all this went on deaf ears on the Opposite Party No.2 and he even refused to reply back.

 

5. It has further been alleged that the complainant again contacted the Opposite Party No.4, the manufacturer company, if they can fix the problems in air cooler, to which they replied that they cannot fix the problem as the complainant does not have a receipt/ bill of the product, and OP-4 also informed that it has cancelled the Opposite Party No.1's license to sell their products as they have been receiving complaints against the opposite party No.1. Now, it became clear that the Opposite Parties Nos.2 &3 were avoiding to issue the receipt/ bill of the air coolers purchased by the complainant for this reason.

 

6. It has also been contended by complainant that the Opposite Party No.2 & 3 assured the complainant to provide the original receipt/ bill of the air cooler and also good services but they have miserably failed to comply with any of the said promises. Since inception, the Opposite Parties 1 to 3 had dishonest intention and by giving false promises dishonestly induced the complainant to purchase a faulty product and not providing the original receipt/ bill of the air cooler causing wrongful gain to them and wrongful loss to the complainant. The Complainant, realizing that he had been trapped by the misrepresentation made by the Opposite Parties, into purchasing a faulty product, had served a legal notice dated 07.11.2017 to the Opposite Parties, demanding them to compensate within 10 days of the date of receipt of the legal notice. The Opposite Parties have miserably failed to reply to the said legal notice. Copy of the legal notice dated 07.11.2017, issued on behalf of the Complainant to the Opposite Parties is annexed with the complaint as ANNEXURE C-4. It has further been alleged that due to the negligent acts of the Opposite Parties, the complainant has suffered loss and injury due to deprivation, harassment and mental agony, especially during the peak summer heat of the year 2017 for which he is entitled to compensation. The complainant is a heart patient and has also undergone hospitalization. All the Opposite Parties are jointly and severally liable as they have acted extremely negligently in providing service to the complainant. Therefore, the instant complaint has been filed with the prayer of directions to the OPs:-

 

1. Rs.62,500/- towards the actual cost of the faulty air-cooler in question;
2.  Rs.2,00,000/- towards mental trauma, tension & stress caused to the complainant and his family especially during peak heat in summer of 2017 due to faulty product;
3.  Rs.50,000/- towards costs of litigation & Interest @ 24% per annum w.e.f. April, 2017 till actual realization.

 

2.       Accordingly, notices were issued to the OPs to defend the complaint before the commission but the OPs neither appeared nor did send any communication despite service. Since the OPs have chosen not to contest the allegations levelled in the complaint despite service and has been proceeded Ex-parte, the allegations made by the Complainant have remained un-rebutted.

3.       Therefore, the complaint has been examined on merits on the basis of the documents/evidences and material available on records. Since the OPs have chosen not to contest the allegations levelled in the complaint despite service, it is considered as deemed acceptance of the allegations by the OPs and the available record is sufficient to prove that the Opposite Parties have failed provide Bill/invoice of the product sold to the complainant. Besides, the OPs have also failed to provide functional cooler to the complainant which was purchased by the complainant for the comfort of his family during summer season and it has caused mental agony and harassment to complainant & his family. Therefore, we are of the considered view that the complainant has suffered directly due to deficient service of the OP 1, 2 & 3 in terms of the deficiency defined in the Act which includes any fault, imperfection, shortcoming or inadequacy in the quality, nature and manner of performance which is required to be maintained in relation to any service and includes any act of negligence or omission or commission by such person which causes loss or injury to the consumer. Besides, the OP-1 to 3 have also been found involved in unfair trade practice for Non-issuance of Bill/invoice of the cooler,

4.       Therefore, we feel appropriate to direct the OP 1 to OP-3 to pay jointly and severally, to the complainant:-

 

1. Rs.62500/- (Rupees Sixty Two Thousand five Hundred only), within thirty (30) days from the date of receipt of this order, with interest at the rate of 9% p.a. from 25-05-2018  till the date of the payment;
2. Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) as compensation for the mental  pain, agony and harassment.

 

8.       It is clarified that in case, the abovesaid amount is not paid by the OP-2 to the Complainant within 30 days from the receipt of this order, the OP-2 shall be liable to pay interest @12% per annum on the aforesaid amount, from the date of expiry of 30 days period.

9.       The complainant shall handover the defective Cooler to the OP-1 to 3 on receipt of the amount, as ordered above.

10.     Order be given dasti to the parties in accordance with rules. Order be also uploaded on the website. Thereafter, file be consigned to the record room.

 

              ASHWANI KUMAR MEHTA                                           HARPREET KAUR CHARYA

                Member                                                                                   Member    

    DCDRC-1 (North)                                                                   DCDRC-1 (North)

 

DIVYA JYOTI JAIPURIAR

President 

DCDRC-1 (North)