By Smt. Padmini Sudheesh, President<br /> <br /> The petitioner’s case is that :<br /> <br /> The petitioner purchased a Refrigerator from the 2nd respondent bearing Model No.S 332 WD & Serial No.BRF 426000545 on payment of ready cash of Rs.12,800/-. At the time of purchase six years warranty was also assured. He has purchased the refrigerator for the purpose of selling cool drinks at the small shop run by him. Immediately after the purchase some malfunctioning was noticed. Petitioner informed the 2nd respondent and requested to rectify. The mechanics deputed by the 2nd respondent inspected the equipment and demanded Rs.3000/- towards the expenses for repairing the same. When the petitioner informed them that it is a new product supplied by the 2nd respondent and well within the guarantee period, those mechanics refused to repair. Then the petitioner directly contacted the 2nd respondent and the 2nd respondent withdrawn from his commitments and refused to rectify. There is deficiency in service. Hence this complaint.<br /> <br /> The counter of 1st respondent in brief is as follows:<br /> <br /> 2. The refrigerator purchased by the petitioner was for domestic purposes, but it was used for commercial purpose. Hence there is breach of warranty conditions. No written complaint is put to this respondent. The Engineer from the service agency of 2nd respondent inspected the equipment and it was noticed that the defect was because of the careless use by the petitioner. The petitioner has agreed that he has used iron rode for removing the ice cubes, hence the compressor became defective. He has also agreed to bear the expenses<br /> <br /> The counter of 2nd respondent is that :<br /> 3. In the beginning the refrigerator has no complaint and only after eight months petitioner has complained the defects. So there is no manufacturing defects. Petitioner has used iron rods for removing the ice cubes, hence it became malfunctioning. Petitioner is also stored more things than the required capacity. Only because of the irresponsible usage defects are happened. Hence dismiss the complaint. <br /> <br /> 4. The points for consideration are :<br /> 1)Whether the petitioner is entitled for replacement of a new refrigerator or refund of the price ?<br /> 2)Whether there is deficiency in service ?<br /> 3) Reliefs and costs?<br /> <br /> 5. The evidence consists of Ext. P1 and P2, no other evidence.<br /> <br /> 6.Point No.1 The refrigerator purchased by petitioner became defective immediately after the purchase. There is one year full guarantee and 5 years warranty to the compressor. The equipment was purchased on 16/5/05 on payment of ready cash of Rs.12,800/-. According to the petitioner the refrigerator started certain malfunctioning like unusual sounds, emitting from the compressor and poor cooling. When the trouble continued and food stuffs stored in the refrigerator started to spoil he had informed the 2nd respondent. The respondents are also admitted the defects. Their version is that only because of the rough use of the petitioner, it became defective and they are not responsible. In the petition it is averred that the 2nd respondent assured the guarantee of 6 years from the date of purchase. In the counter of 1st respondent it is made clear that one year full guarantee and 5years warranty to the compressor. The Engineer who had deputed by the 2nd respondent inspected the refrigerator and found that there is defect to the compressor. Whatever may be the reason stated, the compressor was in complaint. The complaint is within the warranty period. So the respondents are liable to replace a new refrigerator of the same model.<br /> <br /> 7.Point No.2 There is deficiency in service on the part of 2nd respondent. The mechanics deputed by the 2nd respondent inspected the equipment and demanded Rs.3000/- for repair. When it was informed that it is a new product supplied by the 2nd respondent and is within the guarantee period, the mechanics refused to repair and when directly contacted the 2nd respondent, they withdrawn from their commitments and refused to repair. 2nd respondent did not deny this fact. This is a serious deficiency on their part. 2nd respondent’s attitude can not be justified. So he has to penalize it.<br /> <br /> 8. In the result the complaint is allowed and the respondents are directed to replace a new refrigerator of the same model to the petitioner and the petitioner is liable to return the old refrigerator immediately after the replacement. 2nd respondent is further directed to pay Rs.2000/- (Rupees Two thousand only) towards compensation and Rs.1000/-(Rupees One thousand only) as costs. Comply the order within one month.<br /> <br /> Dictated to the Confdl. Asst., transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the open forum this the 31st day of July 2008<br />