View 1183 Cases Against Videocon
SHIVANI TYAGI filed a consumer case on 17 Oct 2016 against VIDEOCON in the East Delhi Consumer Court. The case no is CC/581/2015 and the judgment uploaded on 09 Mar 2017.
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM, EAST, Govt of NCT Delhi
CONVENIENT SHOPPING CENTRE, 1st FLOOR, SAINI ENCLAVE, DELHI 110092
Consumer complaint no. 581 / 2015
Date of Institution 04/08/2015
Order Reserved on 17/10/2016
Date of Order 20/10/2016
In matter of
Mrs. Shivani Tyagi, adult
w/o Sh Virender Mohan Bijalwan
R/o Flat no 08 Anupam Apartments
Vasundhara Enclave, Delhi 110096.……………….……..…………….Complainant
Vs
1-M/s Videocon Industries Ltd
296, Udhyug Vihar Industrial Area Phase 2
Gurgaon 122001
2-The Manager,
Galaxy Solution
A 18, 100 Futa Road Hardev Puri
Shahdara Delhi 110093……………………………...……………………… Opponents
Complainant……………………………………In Person
Opponent ……....……………………………..Ex Parte
Quorum Sh Sukhdev Singh President
Dr P N Tiwari Member
Mrs Harpreet Kaur Member
Order by Dr P N Tiwari Member
Brief Facts of the case
Complainant stated that the AC developed water leaking problem on 16/06/2015 so called OP1 on 17/06/2015 and that same problem was rectified and for the services of engineer, she paid Rs 550/ vide receipt no 032/book no 23 annexed here as Annexure I.
Complainant stated that the same problem restarted and called OP 1 which was too attended by the service engineer. The engineer told complainant that the outlet water pipe was blocked, so required to be changed and would cost Rs 4450/. Later the same defect was rectified after replacing the new part and amount including service charges was too paid Rs 4450/- vide receipt no. 046,book no. 19.
Complainant stated that the same water leaking problem restarted, so she called OP2 on 02/07/2015. It was assured for early service by OP2. But no one attended the complaint despite of sending number of emails. Only assurance was given by OP2. Hence, she filed this complaint for the deficiency in services by OPs and claiming refund of repairing charges Rs 20,000/- harassment and mental agony Rs 30,000/- with litigation charges Rs 2000/-.
Notices were served. OP area manager appeared and complaint copy was received by him, but did not file their written statement or any evidences on affidavit despite of giving ample opportunities. The case was preceded Ex Parte against OPs. Complainant filed her Ex Parte evidences on affidavit. Arguments were heard and order was reserved.
We have gone through all the facts and evidences on record. It was evident that complainant approached OP1 for rectifying water leaking problem repeatedly and had paid the service charges and also for blocked outlet pipe also.
Despite of this, the defect remained as it was. Even complaining to OP2, did not resolve her complaint. More so, after receiving the complaint copy by OP, did not submit their reply or evidences and also not put their appearance in argument stage, thus complainant had proved deficiency in service by OPs.
So, we are of the opinion that this complaint be allowed with the following order -
The copy of this order be sent to the parties as per rules and file be consigned to the Record Room.
Mrs Harpreet Kaur (Dr) P N Tiwari
Member Member
Shri Sukhdev Singh
President
Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes
Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.