BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, AMRITSAR.

Consumer Complaint No.666 of 14

Date of Institution: 19-12-2014

(Original No.759 of 12, date of Institution No. 10-12-2012)

Date of Decision: 12-05-2015

Vipin Pali son of Sh.Gian Chand, resident of House No. 3152, Street No.3, Near Sharma Dairy, Putlighar, Amritsiar.

Complainant

Versus

1. Voltas Limited, Voltas House, ‘A’ Block, Dr.Babasaheb  Ambedkar Road, Chinchpokli, Mumbai-400033.
2. M/s.International Radio & Electrical Engineers, Chowk Farid, Amritsar, Punjab.
3. M/s.Vision Care Centre (Voltas AC Repair Centre), Shop No.12-13,  Gali No.1, Chaudhary Market, Inside Shimla Market, Putlighar, Amritsar.

Opposite Parties

Complaint under section 12/13 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 as amended upto date.

Present: For the Complainant: In person.

              For the Opposite Party No.1: Sh. Sanjeev Arora, Advocate

              For the Opposite Party No.2: Exparte.

              For the Opposite Party No.3: Exparte.

Quorum:

Sh.Bhupinder Singh, President

Ms.Kulwant Kaur Bajwa, Member

Mr.Anoop Sharma, Member 

Order dictated by:

Sh.Bhupinder Singh, President.

1. This complaint has been remanded back vide order dated 19.11.2014 of Hon’ble State Commission, Punjab, Chandigarh to this District Forum for deciding the same on merits.
2. Present complaint has been filed by Sh.Vipin Pali under the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act alleging therein that he purchased a Voltas Split AC (Prime S Three Star) of 1.5 ton capacity alongwith its  transformer from Opposite Party No.2 on 23.6.2012 for Rs.30,000/- vide bill N. 41611 (under 4 x 8 finance scheme). Complainant alleges that besides the purchase amount, the complainant spent Rs.2500/- on its transformer and Rs.4500/- on its installation including stand for outdoor unit, electric articles and  fitting charges. Complainant further alleges that said AC worked only for two weeks and thereafter, there was absolutely no cooling and a sound started coming from its indoor unit. Complainant approached Opposite Party No.2 who instructed the complainant to register a complaint with Customer Care of Voltas Limited i.e. Opposite Party No. 3. The complainant registered a complaint with Opposite Party No. 3 and after 5 days, a boy namely Aman sent by Opposite Party No.3 who told that the gas from the outdoor unit had leaked and filled gas. But he did not do anything about the noise coming from indoor unit. He also did not disclose as to why the gas had leaked from the brand new AC. After gas filling, the AC gave cooling only for 6 days and  thereafter, again the same problem persisted i.e. no cooling  besides irritating noise coming from its indoor unit. On further complaint, one boy namely Simranjit Singh alongwith another boy came  after 5 days and after examining the unit for some time, they took  outdoor unit with them. After 5 days, they came back with outdoor unit and told the problem had been removed and further assured that now the AC will work perfectly. But to the utter disappointment of the complainant, the AC did dot work properly. The complainant again registered a complaint with Opposite Party No.3. After another 4 days, a boy namely Sandeep Singh alongwith another boy came and examined the entire piping etc. and filled gas and assured that this time there will not be any problem with cooling. But the said assurance failed on that night itself, as the entire gas leaked again and AC failed to give any cooling. Rather the internal unit started producing loud noise. Again the complainant lodged complaints with Opposite Parties on so many times, but to no affect. Alleging the same to be deficiency in service, complaint was filed seeking directions to the opposite parties to refund the amount of Rs.27500/- alongwith interest @ 18% per annum from the date of purchase  of the AC till the actual payment or to replace the defective AC with brand new AC and install it in working condition after filling gas  into the same.  Compensation and litigation expenses were also demanded.
3. On notice, Opposite Parties  filed written version in which they have  denied all the averments taken by the complainant in his complaint. It is also denied that the complainant has purchased the AC in question from Opposite Party No.2. It is also denied that the AC worked only for two week and thereafter, there was no cooling and a sound started coming from its indoor unit. It is also denied that the complainant served a legal notice dated 1.9.2012 to the Opposite Party through speed post.  While denying and controverting other allegations, dismissal of complaint was prayed.
4. Complainant tendered into evidence his affidavits Ex.CW1/A, Ex.CW2/A, affidavit of Jaimal Singh Gill Ex.CW3/A  alongwith documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C10 and closed the evidence on behalf of the complainant.
5. Opposite Party No.1 tendered into evidence affidavit of Sh.Karanvir Singh Kanwar, Assistant Service Manger Ex.OP1/1 and  closed the evidence on behalf of the Opposite Party No.1
6. We have carefully gone through the pleadings of the parties; arguments advanced by the ld.counsel for the parties and have appreciated the evidence produced on record by both the parties with the valuable assistance of the ld.counsel for both the parties.
7. From the record i.e. pleadings of the parties and the evidence produced on record by the parties, it is clear that the complainant  purchased a Voltas Split AC (Prime S Three Star) of 1.5 ton capacity from Opposite Party No.2 on 23.6.2012 for Rs.30,000/- vide bill No. 41611 dated 23.6.2012 Ex.C3. Complainant alleges that said AC worked only for two weeks and thereafter, it became defective and was giving no cooling and a sound started coming from its indoor unit. Complainant approached Opposite Party No.2 who instructed the complainant to approach the  Customer Care of Voltas Limited i.e. Opposite Party No.3. The complainant registered a complaint with Opposite Party No.3 and after some days, one boy namely Aman sent by Opposite Party No.3 who told that the gas from the outdoor unit had leaked and filled gas. But he did not do anything about the noise coming from indoor unit. He also did not disclose as to why the gas had leaked from the brand new AC. After gas filling, the AC gave cooling only for 6 days and thereafter, again the same problem persisted i.e. no cooling besides irritating noise coming from its indoor unit. On further complaint, one boy namely Simranjit Singh alongwith another boy came after 5 days and after examining the unit for some time, they took outdoor unit with them. After 5 days, they came back with outdoor unit and told the problem had been removed and further assured that now the AC will work perfectly. But to the utter disappointment of the complainant, the AC did dot work properly. The complainant again registered a complaint with Opposite Party No.1. After another 4 days, a boy namely Sandeep Singh alongwith another boy came and examined the entire piping etc. and filled gas and assured that this time there will not be any problem with cooling. But the said assurance failed on that night itself, as the entire gas leaked again and AC failed to give any cooling, rather the internal unit started producing loud noise. Again the complainant contacted Opposite Party No.3 i.e. the authorised service centre of Opposite Party No.1 who sent two persons and they took the indoor unit of the AC with them  in the month of August, 2012. Thereafter, the Opposite Parties  neither returned the indoor unit of the AC nor rectified the defect in the AC in question.  Ld.counsel for the   complainant  submitted that all this amounts to deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties.
8. Whereas the Opposite Parties  have denied all the averments taken by the complainant in his complaint. They also denied that one boy namely Aman went to the house of the complainant to check the Split AC and filled any gas. They also denied that another boy namely Simranjit Singh or Sandeep Singh alongwith another boy went to the house of the complainant. They also denied that the complainant got register complaint with Opposite Party No.1. Opposite Parties  also denied that any legal notice dated 1.9.2012 Ex.C4 was served upon the Opposite Parties, rather no notice was served by the complainant upon the Opposite Parties.  Ld.counsel for the opposite party submitted that there is no deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties.
9. From the entire above discussion, we have come to the conclusion that the complainant purchased a Voltas Split AC (Prime S Three Star) of 1.5 ton capacity from Opposite Party No.2 on 23.6.2012 for Rs.30,000/- vide bill No. 41611 dated 23.6.2012 Ex.C3. As per the allegations of the complainant, said Split AC became defective within few days from the date of its purchase and it stopped cooling and its internal unit started giving noise. The complainant approached the customer care centre of Opposite Party No.1 Voltas Limited so many times and some persons came  from the Opposite Parties  who filled in gas and made the AC functional, but even thereafter the AC again started giving same problem. However, the complainant could not produce any job sheet from Opposite Party No.3 i.e. authorized service centre of Voltas Limited. However, ld.counsel for Opposite Party No.1 during the course of arguments stated that the Opposite Parties  No.1 and 3 are ready to set right the defect of the Split AC in question of the complainant and to replace the parts, if any, of the split AC, without charging any amount from the complainant to make the Split AC of the complainant fully functional to the satisfaction of the complainant.
10. Resultantly, this complainant is disposed of with the directions to Opposite Parties  No.1 and 3 to repair the Split AC of the complainant and set right the defect, if any or to replace the part of the split AC to make the Split AC of the complainant fully functional to the satisfaction of the complainant within one month from the date of receipt of copy of this order and to extend the warranty of the Split AC of the complainant for another 6 months from the date, the Split AC in question is installed at the premises of the complainant after making it fully functional. Keeping in view the peculiar circumstances of the case, the parties are left to bear their own costs.    Copies of the order be furnished to the parties free of costs. File is ordered to be consigned to the record room. Case could not be disposed of within the stipulated period due to heavy pendency of the cases in this Forum.

Dated: 12-05-2015.                                                   (Bhupinder Singh)                                                                                               President

hrg                                                 (Kulwant Kaur Bajwa)    (Anoop Sharma)

              Member                         Member