Andhra Pradesh

Visakhapatnam-II

CC/222/2012

Sai Baba Naik - Complainant(s)

Versus

Whirlpool India Limited - Opp.Party(s)

G. Parvateeswara Rao

30 Apr 2015

ORDER

                                              Date of Registration of the Complaint:31-12-2012

                                                                                                Date of Order:30-04-2015

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMERS FORUM-II AT

                             VISAKHAPATNAM

 

P  r  e  s  e  n  t:

1.  Sri H. Ananda Rao, M.A., L.L.B.,

     President   

2. Smt K. Saroja, M.A. B.L.,

     Lady Member 

3. Sri C.V. Rao,  M.A., B.L.,

                                     Male Member

 

                                  Thursday, the 30^th day of April, 2015.

                                      CONSUMER CASE No.222/2012

Between:-

Sai Baba Naik, S/o late Raghunath Naik,

Hindu, aged 40 years, residing at Door

No.33-14-142, Allipuram Main Road,

Visakhapatnam-530004.

….. Complainant

And:-

1.Whirlpool India Limited, rep. by its Manager,

   Consumer Service Department, A-8, Qutab

   Institutional Area, “Vaitalik”, 2^nd Floor,

   NEW DELHI-110067.

2.Sri Lakshmi Engineering, D. No. 44-38-12/4,

   Flat No.G-4, Vijayakrishna Towers,

   80 Feet Road, Akkayyapalem, Visakhapatnam.

3.J.D. Electronics, situated at Door No.47-15-12,

   Dwarakanagar, Parvatinadham  Complex,

   Visakhapatnam-530016.

 

                                                                                      …  Opposite Parties

                           

          This case coming on 24.04.2015 for final hearing before us in the presence of Sri G. Parvateeswara Rao, Advocate for the Complainant and Sri K.V. Udaya Bhasker, Advocate for the 1^st Opposite Party and 2^nd and 3^rd Opposite Parties being exparte and having stood over till this date for consideration, this Forum made the following:

 

 

                                                ORDER

          (As per Sri C. V. Rao, Honourable Male Member, on behalf of the Bench)

 

1.       The Complainant asks the Forum to pass an order in his favour and against the Opposite Parties: a) to direct the Opposite Parties to provide new Refrigerator, b) to pay Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen thousand only) for the mental agony suffered by the Complainant, c) Costs of the proceedings; and d) for such other relief or reliefs as the Forum deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

 

2.       The 1^st Opposite Party strongly resisted the claim of the Complainant and asked the Forum to dismiss the Complaint with exemplary costs.

 

3.       The Opposite Parties 2 and 3 did not resist the claim of the Complainant as they were set exparte and remained set exparte.

           

4.       The case of the Complainant, as can be seen from the Complaint, is that he approached the 3^rd Opposite Party on 30.08.2005 purchased the Whirlpool Refrigerator by paying an amount of Rs.14,400/- and paid Rs.867/- for enhancement of the guarantee period from 5 years to 7 years from the date of purchase.   The Complainant stated that the said Refrigerator got problem frequently from 03.06.2011, then the Complainant lodged the complaint through E-mail to the 1^st Opposite Party with Complaint No.1299 dated 3.6.2011, Complaint No.11198 dated 18.06.2011, Complaint No.HD0110049 dated 10.07.2011, Complaint No. HD 1111005963 dated 09.11.2011, Complaint No. HD 1211013919 dated 25.12.2011, Complaint No.HD031202332 dated 30.03.2012, Complaint No.HD0412007579 dated 12.04.2012 and Complaint No.HD0512021461 dated 28.05.2012 along with so many remainders.   Then the 1^st Opposite Party basing on the first complaint sent their technician through the 2^nd Opposite Party, as the 2^nd Opposite Party is their servicing center to the Complainant’s  house and after opening the Refrigerator the said technician has the condenser of the refrigerator fixed outside the refrigerator instead of concealed by using the Complainant’s cooking gas cylinders and also charged an amount of Rs.400/- and also Rs.200/- for cleaning of the old condenser and Gas charges and did not issue any bill for these amounts and the said technician told that the complaint will not be repeated again, but the above said refrigerator has not been working properly and the complaint has been repeating complaints in the same year several times.   The Complainant further stated that again he gave a complaint on 25.12.2011 to the 1^st Opposite Party and the 1^st Opposite Party sent their service Engineer Mr. Anil Kumar, he has attended to rectify the complaint and said that he would take the complete charge and repair the refrigerator and the complaint would not arise again, but the Complaint has been arising again and again and finally the Complainant lodged a new complaint on 30.03.2012 and for consideration of replacement with a new piece.   After giving the last complaint and remainder by the Complainant, the Complainant received a message to his mobile phone on 13.06.2012 at 1.49 pm. saying that the call had been allotted to Mr. Bhaskar, he would get in touch with the Complainant shortly but till date no person has attended to the Complainant’s message forwarded from LM WPI SVC and did not return the Refrigerator to the Complainant till now; this is nothing but deficiency of service.   Hence, this complaint is filed by the Complainant before this Forum.

 

5.       The Complainant filed an affidavit, besides written arguments to support his claim.      Exs.A1 and A2 are marked for the Complainant.

 

6.       On the other hand, the 1^st Opposite Party resisted the claim of the Complainant by contending, as can be seen from its counter, that the Refrigerator purchased by the Complainant is roughly 7 years old as the date of purchase was 30.08.2005.   The 1^st Opposite Party stated that there is no complaint from the Complainant till 3.6.2011 as mentioned in his complaint which shows that he had used the product without any problem from the date of purchase till 3.6.2011 which also shows that the Complainant has approached this Forum with a malafide intention to make undue gain for which he is not entitled.     The 1^st Opposite Party further stated that the terms of warranty is for first year it will cover the appliance and the rest of the years of warranty cover only on condenser, evaporator and compressor.   As and when there was a demand by the Complainant for any necessary rectifications in the Refrigerator, the same were duly attended and rectified to the entire satisfaction of the Complainant/customer by the 1^st Opposite Party’s Authorized Service Partner.   The 1^st Opposite Party stated also that even today they are ready to rectify the defects if any in the refrigerator of the Complainant, provided the Complainant bears all the repairing charges and also costs of the spares that are now likely to be replaced in the product.    The 1^st Opposite Party further stated that the complaint is based on false allegations and the Complainant deserves no reliefs as sought in the complaint, the complaint is liable to be dismissed with exemplary costs.   The 1^st Opposite Party stated that the Complainant has not filed any document before this Forum to prove his claim.

 

7.       The 1^st Opposite Party filed an evidence affidavit to buttress its contention.   However, no exhibits are marked for the 1^st Opposite Party.

 

8.       The matter has been heard on behalf of the Complainant as well as the 1^st Opposite Party.

         

9.       After careful perusal of the case record, this Forum finds that the main allegation of the Complainant that the Opposite Parties neither repaired his Refrigerator nor returned it to him till now, is not rebutted by the 1^st Opposite Party.   As such, it has to be surmised that the Opposite Parties retained the Complainant’s defective refrigerator for the last 3 years without repairing it.     Even after filing of this complaint by the Complainant, for the last 3 years, the Opposite Parties retained the said defective refrigerator with them.   This clearly shows outright deficiency of service cum unfair trade practice on the part of the Opposite Parties.   As such, the Opposite Parties have to pay the cost of the Refrigerator with interest from the date of filing this complaint till the date of actual realization.    Because of the deficiency of service cum unfair trade practice on the part of the Opposite Parties, the Complainant should have suffered physical and financial hardship besides mental agony, he is entitled to some compensation also.   As the Complainant is forced to file this complaint because of the deficiency of service cum unfair trade practice on the part of the Opposite Parties, he is entitled to costs of this complaint too.      

 

10.     In the result, this Forum directs the Opposite Parties 1 to 3 to pay: a) the cost of the defective Refrigerator i.e., Rs.14,400/- (Rupees Fourteen thousand and four hundred only) with interest @ 9% p.a. from 12.7.2012 till the date of actual realization, b) a compensation of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees Two thousand only) and c) Costs of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees Two thousand only) to the Complainant.    Time for compliance, one month.

 

 

     Dictated to the Steno, transcribed by him, corrected and pronounced by us in the Open Forum, this the 30^th day of April, 2015.

 

 Sd/-                                          Sd/-                                           Sd/-

President                          Lady Member                           Male Member

 

                             APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

For the Complainant:-

NO.	DATE	DESCRIPTIONOFTHEDOCUMENTS	REMARKS
Ex.A01	30.08.2005	Cash/Credit Memo issued by the 2nd OP in favour of the Complainant	Original
Ex.A02	04.10.2005	Guarantee Card with Receipt	Original

For the Opposite Parties:-               

-Nil-

 Sd/-                                  Sd/-                                                       Sd/-

President                            Lady Member                             Male Member