IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KOTTAYAM
Dated this the 30th day of September, 2021
Present: Sri. Manulal V.S. President
Smt. Bindhu R, Member
Sri. K.M. Anto, Member
C C No. 08/2021 (filed on 19/02/2021)
Petitioner : M.M. Joseph,
Mundathanam House,
Ullanadu P.O.
Bharananganam village,
Meenachil Taluk.
(Adv. Mani Jose)
Vs.
Opposite Parties : 1) Whirlpool of India Ltd.
Corporate Office,
Plot No.40, Sector 44,
Gurgaon – 122002.
Rep.by its Managing Director.
2) SSSK Enterprises,
C/o. Whirlpool of India Ltd.
Authorised INCS Dealer,
Navel Base, Kochi,
Rep. by its Manager.
3) JIS Engineers,
Whirlpoor Authorized Service
Centre, Near Govt. Hospital,
Thalayolaparambu – 686 605.
Kottayam.
Rep. by its Proprietor.
O R D E R
Sri. Manulal V.S. President
The case of the complainant is as follows.
The complainant is an ex-service man. The 1st opposite party is the manufacturer of the Whirpool refrigerator and the 2nd opposite party is the dealer of the 1st opposite party. 3rd opposite party is the service centre of the 1st opposite party. On 07-09-2018 the complainant had purchased a refrigerator model if INV 278 ELT COOL ILLUSIA (4S) from the 2nd opposite party, which is manufactured by the 1st opposite party for an amount of Rs.20,750/-. At the time of purchase, the opposite parties offered a warranty for 10 years to the product. That on 09-10-2020 the refrigerator became dysfunctional soon after that the complainant had launched a complaint with the opposite party. But the opposite parties did not turned up. Thereafter due to the continuous compulsion of the complainant, the technician of the 3rd opposite party visited the house of the complainant and inspected the said refrigerator. However he was unable to rectified the defect of the refrigerator. After one month of such visit a technician came to the house of the complainant and rectified the defect. For a period of one month, the refrigerator was dysfunctional and thereby caused damage to the medicines of the complainant’s father. On 09-09-2020 the refrigerator again became defective. Though a complaint was registered with the opposite party, the opposite parties did not care to heed the grievances of the complainant. Thereafter the refrigerator was rectified by the opposite party only on 05-10-2020 and the complainant had to pay Rs.5,901/- as service charges for the same. It is averred in the complaint that due to the deficiency in service and delay in rectifying the defect of the complaint, the complainant and his family had suffered much loss and mental agony. According to the complainant he had suffered much irreparable loss due to the delay in rectifying the defect of the refrigerator. Hence this complaint is filed by the complainant praying for an order directing to the opposite party to pay Rs.50,451/- or in alternative replace the defective refrigerator with a brand new one.
Though the notice was served to the opposite party, they did not care to appear before this Commission and contest the case. Hence the opposite parties are set exparte.
The complainant filed proof affidavit in lieu of chief examination and Ext.A1 to A3 were marked.
On going through the complaint and evidence on record we would consider following points.
- Whether the complainant had succeeded to prove deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties.
- Whether he is entitled for any reliefs?
For the sake of convenience, we would like to consider point No.1 and 2 together.
Point No.1 and 2
The complainant had purchased a refrigerator model No. IF INV 278 ELT COOL ILLUSIA (4S) which is manufactured by the 1st opposite party from the 2nd opposite party on 07-09-2018 after paying a consideration of Rs.20,750/- vide Ext.A2 bill. Ext.A3 is the user manual, which is issued by the 1st opposite party to its customers along with the product. On going through the Ext.A3 user manual, we can see that the manufacturer had assured a 10 year warranty (9+1) for their products. According to the complainant on 09-09-2010, the refrigerator became defective. It is averred in the complaint that he had lodged a complaint with the opposite party regarding the defect in the refrigerator on that day itself, the opposite party did not turned up. It is further averred in the complaint that the defect was rectified only after one month from the date of lodging of the complaint by the technicians of the 3rd opposite party ie. on 05-10-2020. Thereafter on 09-10-2020 the refrigerator again became defective, though the technicians of the 3rd opposite party inspected the refrigerator the defect could not be rectified. On going through the Ext.A1 we can see that on 05-11-2018 Rs.5,901/- was received by the 3rd opposite party as a service charge for rectifying the defects of the refrigerator. On going through Ext.A3, the 1st opposite party offered a 10 year warranty ie. 9+1 for the product. The 1st opposite party offered one year warranty for the component and 9 year warranty for the compressor. Though the complainant averred that the refrigerator, which was sold to him by the opposite parties is an inferior quality he did not adduce any evidence to show that the said refrigerator has been suffering from any manufacturing defect. However Ext.A1 proves that the said refrigerator has suffered some defect and 3rd opposite party has charged Rs.5,901/- from the complainant as service charges during the warranty period. That amounts to deficiency in the service, offered by the opposite parties to the complainant at the time of the purchase of the refrigerator. Thus we are of the opinion that the opposite parties committed deficiency in service by levying service charges during the warranty period. There is no contrary evidence before us to disbelieve the complaint. In the circumstances, we allow the complaint in part and pass the following order.
- We hereby direct the 3rd opposite party to pay an amount of Rs.5,901/- to the complainant.
- We hereby direct the opposite parties 1 to 3 to pay Rs.4,000/- as compensation
- We hereby direct the opposite parties1 to 3 to pay Rs.1,500/- as litigation cost.
Order shall complied with within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of Order.If not complied as directed, the award amount will carry 9% interest from the date or Order till realization.
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed and typed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Commission on this 30th day of September, 2021.
Sri. Manulal V.S. President Sd/-
Smt. Bindhu R, Member Sd/-
Sri. K.M. Anto, Member Sd/-
Appendix
Exhibits marked on the side of the complainant
A1 : Invoice dtd.05-11-2020 issued by 3rd opposite party
A2 : Copy of service receipt issued by 2nd opposite party
A3 : User manual
By Order
Senior Superintendent
