Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

CC/70/2013

Ganesh Krishna - Complainant(s)

Versus

Viveks - Opp.Party(s)

N.Premalatha

05 Oct 2018

ORDER

                                                                        Date of Filing  : 21.04.2014

                                                                          Date of Order : 05.10.2018

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (SOUTH)

@ 2^ND Floor, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C. Nagar, Park Town, Chennai – 3.

 

PRESENT: THIRU. M. MONY, B.Sc., L.L.B, M.L.                    : PRESIDENT

                 TMT. K. AMALA, M.A., L.L.B.                                : MEMBER-I

 

C.C. No.70/2013

DATED THIS FRIDAY THE 05^TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2018

                                 

Ganesh Krishna,

S/o. Mr. K. Anand Awarup Krishnan,

No.475, D2, Mistral, Old Wipro Road,

Sholinganallur,

Chennai -600 119.                                                        .. Complainant.                                                       

..Versus..

 

1. Viveks,

Represented by its Authorized Signatory,

No.288, OMR, (Opp. to Prince Infocity),

Ground & 1^st Floor,

Chennai – 600 041.

 

2. Samsung India Electronics Ltd.,

Represented by its Authorized Signatory,

No24, Rajasekhran Street,

Off. Radhakrishnan Salai,

Mylapore,

Chennai – 600 032.

 

3. Alpha Refrigeration Company,

Represented by its Authorized Signatory,

Shop No.1A/1, Dhanakotti Raja Street,

Ekkattuthangal,

Chennai – 600 032.                                              ..  Opposite parties.

          

Counsel for complainant            :  M/s. N. Premalatha

Counsel for 1^st opposite party   :  M/s. K.P.C. Mogan

Counsel for 2^nd opposite party  :  M/s. V.V. Giridhar & others

Counsel for 3^rd opposite party  :  Exparte

 

ORDER

THIRU. M. MONY, PRESIDENT

       This complaint has been filed by the complainant against the opposite parties under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 praying to replace the defective AC machines with new ones or to refund the amont of Rs.58,670/- paid towards the cost price of the 2 AC machines and to pay a sum of Rs.2,50,000/- towards compensation for deficiency in service, mental agony and mental pressure with cost to the complainant.

1.    The averments of the complaint in brief are as follows:

The complainant submits that he purchased one Samsung 1.5 Ton Split AC and two 1 ton split AC machines of Samsung brand from the 1^st opposite party on 23.02.2012 with one year warranty.   The 2^nd opposite party is the authorized representative of the 1^st opposite party rendering service to the AC machines and installation etc.   Accordingly, the 2^nd opposite party periodically serviced the AC machines.  The complainant submits that in the course of periodical service, there was water spilling inside the room and no proper cooling from the AC units.  It was informed to the opposite parties that the 1^st opposite party service persons found that there was a leakage of gas in 1.5 tone AC and 1 ton AC which was duly rectified.  Thereafter also, the same issue repeatedly raised and was attended by the service persons.   The complainant submits that he went to the 1^st opposite party’s showroom and asked for the replacement of the AC units during the month of December 2012.  The 1^st opposite party directed the complainant to go and seek relief from the 2^nd opposite party.  Hence, the complainant called the 2^nd opposite party to register the complaint.   The 1^st opposite party’s Service Manager, One Mr. Jagadeesh informed that they will send service persons to take the unit to their centre for replacement of coil.  The complainant also did not accept such removal of AC units.  Thereafter, the complainant lodged a complaint with the 2^nd opposite party on 06.01.2013 which was registered with Samsung for replacement.   On 30.01.2013, the complainant received a call from Samsung and was informed that the complainant is not eligible for replacement and they send service technician on 31.01.2013 who checked all three ACs and reported that there is a problem with 1.5 and 1 ton AC units as gas leak issue.   Thereafter, the complainant received a call from the 3^rd opposite party’s technician and was informed that the complainant has to pay a sum of Rs.2,000/- towards service charges which was refused by the complainant, since the AC units are within the period of warranty.  The 3^rd opposite party’s technician came on 12.02.2013 and checked the AC units and represented that there is no guarantee for the AC machines and that the aluminium coil in the AC unit usually would spoil in 2 years.   Thereby, the gas leakage could happen and the cost for such repair would roughly about Rs.6,000/-. Thereafter, the complainant called the technicians and send reminders to the opposite parties and there is no response.  The act of the opposite parties caused great mental agony.   Hence, the complaint is filed.

2.      The brief averments in the written version filed by the  1^st opposite party is as follows:

The 1^st opposite party specifically denies each and every allegation made in the complaint and puts the complainant to strict proof of the same.   The 1^st opposite party states that the allegation of water filling inside the room and other deficiencies alleged by the complainant has not been proved.   There was a gas leakage problem found in 1.5 ton A/c as well as one of the 1 ton A/c during the month of April and May 2012.    Due better service were given to the complainant’s AC units.  The allegation in complaint that he visited the showroom is not correct.   The 1^st opposite party sold new branded machines without any fault.  The complainant never contacted the 1^st opposite party after completion of general services.   The complainant is not entitled for any replacement.   Therefore, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the 1^st opposite party.   Hence the complaint is  liable to be dismissed.

3.      The brief averments in the written version filed by the 2^nd opposite party is as follows:

The 2^nd opposite party specifically denies each and every allegation made in the complaint and puts the complainant to strict proof of the same.   The 2^nd opposite party states that immediately after due intimation from the complainant, the 2^nd opposite party sent service personnel and attended the problem and explained in detail and duly filled up gas.  Thereby, the complainant was greatly satisfied with the AC service and signed in the Job card also.  The 2^nd opposite party got no letters and they are not responsible in any manner to the various allegations made in the complaint.  The 2^nd opposite party is a renowned manufacturer, manufactures good quality products / consumables which are sold in the market by various dealers.  Further the 2^nd opposite party states that this vexatious time barred complaint is filed by the complainant suppressing material facts, making claims only for an unjust enrichment.  There is no cause of action against the 2^nd opposite party for there is no specific question of deficiency in service committed by this opposite party and hence the complaint is liable to be dismissed.

4.     Inspite of receipt of notice, the 3^rd opposite party has not appeared before this Forum and filed written version and proof affidavit and hence the 3^rd opposite party is set Exparte.

5.     To prove the averments in the complaint, the complainant has filed proof affidavit as his evidence and documents Ex.A1 to Ex.A6 are marked.  Proof affidavit of the 1^st opposite party filed and no documents filed and marked on the side of the 1^st opposite party.  Proof affidavit of the 2^nd opposite party filed and no documents filed and marked on the side of the 2^nd opposite party.

6.      The points for consideration is:-

1. Whether the complainant entitled to get replacement of the two defective AC machines or to the cost of the AC machines amounting to Rs.58,670/- as prayed for?

2. Whether the complainant is entitled to a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- towards compensation for deficiency in service and mental agony and cost as prayed for?

7.      On point:-

Both complainant and opposite parties 1 & 2 filed their respective written arguments.  The 3^rd opposite party remained Exparte.  Perused the records namely the complaint, written version, proof affidavits, documents etc.  Admittedly, the complainant purchased one Samsung 1.5 Ton Split AC and two 1 ton split AC machines of Samsung brand from the 1^st opposite party on 23.02.2012 as per Ex.A1 with one year warranty as per Ex.A6.  The 2^nd opposite party is the authorized representative of the 1^st opposite party rendering service to the AC machines and installation etc.   Accordingly, the 2^nd opposite party periodically serviced the AC machines as per Ex.A4.  The complainant further pleaded and contended that in the course of periodical service, there was water spilling inside the room and no proper cooling from the AC units.  It was informed to the opposite parties, the 1^st opposite party service persons found that there was a leakage of gas in 1.5 tone AC and 1 ton AC which was duly rectified.  Thereafter also, the same issue repeatedly raised and was attended by the service persons.  But it was not fully rectified to the satisfaction of the complainant.   On a perusal of Ex.A4 series, it is very clear that there are defects in the AC caused refilling of gas etc. 

8.     Further the contention of the complainant is that he went to the 1^st opposite party’s showroom and asked for the replacement of the AC units during the month of December 2012.  The 1^st opposite party directed the complainant to go and seek the relief from the 2^nd opposite party.  Hence, the complainant called the 2^nd opposite party to register the complaint.   The 1^st opposite party’s Service Manager, One Mr. Jagadeesh informed that they will send service persons to take the unit to their centre for replacement of coil.   But there is no record.  The complainant also did not accepted such removal of AC units.  Thereafter, the complainant lodged a complaint with the 2^nd opposite party on 06.01.2013 which was registered with Samsung for replacement.    But there was no proper response.  On 30.01.2013, the complainant received a call from Samsung  and was informed that the complainant is not eligible for replacement and they send service technician on 31.01.2013 who checked all three ACs and reported that there is a problem with 1.5 and 1 ton AC units as gas leak issue.   Thereafter, the complainant received a call from the 3^rd opposite party’s technician and was informed that the complainant has to pay a sum of Rs.2,000/- towards service charges which was refused by the complainant, since the AC units are within the period of warranty.  The 3^rd opposite party’s technician came on 12.02.2013 and checked the AC units and represented that there is no guarantee for the AC machines and that the aluminium coil in the AC unit usually would spoil in 2 years.   Thereby gas leakage could happen and the cost for such repair would roughly about Rs.6,000/-. Thereafter, the complainant called the technicians and send reminders to the  opposite party and there is no response.  Hence, the complainant filed this complaint claiming replacement or the cost of the AC machines with compensation.   On a careful perusal of records, the complainant has not produced any document to prove that the AC machine is having manufacturing defects.

9.     The learned Counsel for the 1^st opposite party would contend that the allegation of water spilling inside the room and other deficiencies alleged by the complainant has not been proved.  Admittedly, there was a leakage of gas problem in 1.5 & 1 ton AC units.  Due better service were given to the complainant’s AC units.  The allegation in complaint that he visited the showroom is not correct.  The 1^st opposite party sold new branded goods without any fault. The complainant also has not pleaded and proved about the defects.  The complainant is not entitled for any replacement. 

10.    The contention of the 2^nd opposite party is that immediately after due intimation from the complainant, this opposite party sent service personnel and attended the problem and explained in detail and duly filled up gas.  Thereby, the complainant was greatly satisfied with the AC service and signed in the Job card also.  The 2^nd opposite party is a renowned manufacturer and there is no specific question of deficiency in service raised by the complainant in this case.  The complainant also has not proved any kind of manufacturing defect in this case.  But it is seen from the records that there are defects in the 2 AC units which caused refilling of gas.  Considering the facts and circumstances of the case this Forum is of the considered view that the opposite parties 1 to 3 shall rectify the defects and carry out the service in the complaint mentioned two AC units namely 1.5 and 1 ton AC with proper functioning of the AC within one month and shall pay a compensation of Rs.10,000/- with  cost of Rs.5,000/-.

In the result, this complaint is allowed in part.    The opposite parties 1 to 3 are jointly and severally  liable to rectify the defects and carry out the service in the complaint mentioned 2 AC units namely Samsung 1.5 Ton Split AC and 1 Ton Split AC with proper functioning of the AC within one month from the date of receipt of the order and to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) towards compensation for mental agony with cost of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand only) to the complainant.

The above amounts shall be payable within six weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order failing which, the said amounts shall carry interest at the rate of 9% p.a. to till the date of payment.

Dictated  by the President to the Steno-typist, taken down, transcribed and computerized by her, corrected by the President and pronounced by us in the open Forum on this the 05^th day of October 2018. 

 

MEMBER –I                                                                      PRESIDENT

COMPLAINANT SIDE DOCUMENTS:

Ex.A1	23.02.2012	Copy of purchase receipt
Ex.A2	19.02.2013	Copy of registered post receipt
Ex.A3	19.02.2013	Copy of notice to the opposite parties
Ex.A4	23.02.2013	Coy of acknowledgements
Ex.A5 Series	20.04.2012 to 21.08.2012	Installation or breakdown or Preventive Maintenance Report – 8 Nos.
Ex.A6		Copy of warranty  conditions

 

1^ST OPPOSITE  PARTY SIDE DOCUMENTS:  NIL

2^ND OPPOSITE  PARTY SIDE DOCUMENTS:  NIL

 

 

MEMBER –I                                                                      PRESIDENT