Before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Rohtak.
Complaint No. : 432.
Instituted on : 07.10.2020.
Decided on : 03.02.2021.
V.B.Malik r/o H.No.68-A, Sector-1, Rohtak, Haryana.
………..Complainant.
Vs.
- Whirlpool of India Ltd. Whirlpool House, Plot No.40, Sector-44, Gurugram, Haryana.
- Cloudtail India Private Limited, Khasra No.58/12/2/2/2Min, 19Min, 20/2, 21/1, 21/2, 21/3, 57/23/2, 24, 25, 63/3/1/1, 4/1, 5/1, Bilaspur, Adjoining Ansal Pioneer City Gurugaon-122413, Haryana, India.
……….Opposite parties.
COMPLAINT U/S 12 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,1986.
BEFORE: SH.NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT.
DR. RENU CHAUDHARY, MEMBER.
MS. TRIPTI PANNU, MEMBER.
Present: Complainant in person.
Opposite parties exparte.
ORDER
NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT:
1. Brief facts of the complaint are that the complainant had purchased a Whirpool refrigerator NEO DF278 PRM Real steels(3S) Frost-Free, Freezer on top Refrigerator(265Ltrs, 2 Star Rating) through Amazon for Rs.22499/- vide invoice No.DRJ1fEtHN in May 04, 2017. The alleged refrigerator was sold by the opposite party No.2. The alleged refrigerator stopped cooling on 22.01.2020 just within a period of two and half years. Complainant contacted the representative of the company Sh. Kishan Sheoran, who charged Rs.430/- for visit and after inspection, conveyed the complainant that the upper portion had burnt and required to be changed. As per policy, the company exchanges such fridge though against some charges. So the complainant contacted customer care of the company on 23.01.2020 but there was no response. He again contacted customer care on 28.01.2020 and representative of the company on 07.02.2020 but no response was received from the company. It is averred that company claims life of a ‘fridge’ minimum of 10 years, but in this case, the refrigerator went out of order even before three years, due to which the life of the complainant had been disturbed badly. It is further submitted that the post selling services of the fridge are not customer friendly. As such there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties. Hence this complaint and it is prayed that opposite parties may kindly be directed to replace the faulty fridge with new one and to pay an amount of Rs.15000/- on account of mental agony & torture and an amount of Rs.5000/- on account of cost of litigation to the complainant.
2. After registration of complaint, notices were issued to the opposite parties. Notices sent to opposite party No.1 & 2 through registered post not received either served or unserved. None appeared on behalf of opposite party no.1 & 2 and as such opposite party No.1 & 2 were proceeded against exparte vide order dated 09.12.2020 of this Commission.
3. Complainant in his exparte evidence has tendered affidavit Ex.CW1/A, documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C5 and closed his evidence on dated 02.02.2021.
4. As per bill Ex.C1, complainant had purchased the refrigerator in question on dated 04.05.2017 for Rs.22499/-. As per complaints made by the complainant, placed on record as Ex.C3 & Ex.C4, the refrigerator in question become defective on 22.01.2020. Representative of the opposite party charged Rs.430/- for the visit and he told that there was fire in the upper portion, perhaps freezer portion of the fridge had caught fire and required to be changed. Photocopy of photographs of burnt portion of refrigerator is placed on record as Ex.C2. But despite repeated requests of the complainant, opposite parties did not response in a positive manner and complainant had to file the present complaint due to deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties. On the other hand, opposite parties did not appear before this Forum despite notices through registered post and were proceeded against exparte, which shows that they have nothing to say in the matter and all the allegations leveled by the complainant against the opposite parties regarding selling of inferior quality of product and irresponsible behavior of the opposite parties stands proved. As such there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties and opposite party no.1 being the manufacturer of the product is liable to replace the refrigerator in question. 5. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, we hereby allow the complaint and direct the opposite party No.1 to replace the refrigerator in question with new one and also to pay a sum of Rs.5000/-(Rupees five thousand only) as compensation on account of deficiency in service and Rs.2000/-(Rupees two thousand only) as litigation expenses to the complainant within one month from the date of decision. However, opposite party No.1 is further directed to deliver the new refrigerator at the house of the complainant and pick-up the old refrigerator in question from the house of complainant.
6. Copy of this order be supplied to both the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.
Announced in open court:
03.02.2021.
................................................
Nagender Singh Kadian, President
..........................................
Renu Chaudhary, Member.
…………………………….
Tripti Pannu, Member.
