Per:- Mrs. Bidnurkar, Member Place : BANDRA JUDGMENT The Complainant is a ‘consumer’ under Section-2(1)(d) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. [2] The Opposite Party No.1 is a manufacturer, who manufacturers the refrigerators with ‘Whirlpool’ brand. [3] The Opposite Party No.2 is the authorized after-sales service provider of the Opposite Party No.1. [4] The Complainant had availed the services of the Opposite Party No.2 for repairing his fridge. [5] The Complainant states that he owns a ‘Whirlpool’ refrigerator, Model No.320 Sumo. He contends that since from the date of purchase, it is not properly functioning. In the month of Feb-2008, there was a leakage problem with the refrigerator. Therefore, the Complainant contacted with the Opposite Party No.2. The Opposite Party No.2 sent his service engineer named as Mr. Santosh Bhise for inspection/repairing. He told the Complainant that there was a problem with time due to which ice accumulated in a particular part of the refrigerator. He suggested to change the timer to stop the leakage. Accordingly, the Complainant changed the timer and he paid Rs.1,800/- for the part and service charges [at Exhibit-A]. The service engineer told the Complainant to stop leakage 15 days to month would be required since ice accumulated will take time to evaporate. [6] The Complainant further states that after 15 days, it was observed that besides leakage, there was ice accumulation problem. Hence he again called up the Opposite Party No.2 and the same service engineer came. After checking, he told the Complainant that the contents in the fridge were not properly arranged so that the air vents were being blocked and hence, the ice was accumulated. So, the Complainant rearranged the things inside the refrigerator in presence of the service engineer. [7] However, the problem of ice accumulation persisted. Again the Complainant contacted the Opposite Party No.2. At this time also the same service engineer came. After checking he told the Complainant that ice formation is not due to the blocking of air vents but due to the fault in gasket and will try to repair it. But there was a leakage problem still persisted. [8] The Complainant further states that there was no communication from service engineer. Therefore, once again he called up the Opposite Party No.2 and told for both problems. This time the Complainant particularly told the Opposite Party No.2 for not sending same service engineer who could not solve these problems. Inspite of this instruction, the Opposite Party No.2 sent the same person for service again. He could not do anything. Hence again he called up the Opposite Party No.2. This time the Opposite Party told the Complainant that he will send another person for service. But nobody turned up. [9] The Complainant states that he was fed up of following up with the Opposite Party No.2. Therefore, he contacted the Opposite Party No.1 to look into the matter to solve the problems. However, there was no response from the Opposite Party No.1. So again the Complainant on several occasions contacted with the Opposite Party No.2, but there was no response from the Opposite Party No.2. [10] Lastly, the Complainant sent a notice intimating the Opposite Parties that in failure to rectify the problem, he shall take legal action as against the Opposite Parties. [11] The Complainant states that there is a deficiency in service by the Opposite Parties due to which he has to suffer the problems of leakages and accumulation of ice in the refrigerator. [12] Therefore, he has filed this complaint in this Forum claiming the following relief:- (a) To direct the Opposite Parties to replace the said refrigerator with a new refrigerator or in the alternative immediately have the said refrigerator repaired at no cost to the Complainant; (b)To direct the Opposite Parties to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards the expenses incurred by the Complainant; (c) To direct the Opposite Parties to pay a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- towards compensation to the Complainant; and (d)For such other relief as this Forum may deem fit and proper. [13] Notice of this complaint was issued to the Opposite Parties. Record shows that the notice was duly served upon the Opposite Parties. Despite due notice, the Opposite Parties remained absent. Hence, ex-parte order to proceed the matter with ex-parte was passed. [14] The complaint is filed alongwith an affidavit and the supportive documents. [15] On perusing the complaint and the documents on the record, following points arose for our consideration:- Sr. No. | Points for consideration | Findings | 1. | Whether the Complainant can prove the deficiency in service? | YES | 2. | Whether the Complainant can ask for replacement of the said refrigerator with a new refrigerator? | NO | 3. | Whether the Complainant ask for immediate repairing with free of cost? | Partly allowed. | 4. | Whether the Complainant can ask for Rs.10,000/- towards the expenses incurred by him? | Yes. Partly allowed up to Rs.2,000/-. | 5. | Whether the Complainant can aske for the costs of the proceeding? | Yes. Up to Rs.1,000/-. |
REASONING [16] The Complainant had availed the after-sales service from the Opposite Party No.2. The Opposite Party No.2 is the authorized service centre of the Opposite Party No.1. [17] For rectifying the problem of leakages and ice accumulation, he was charged Rs.1,800/-. Receipt at Exhibit. [18] The Opposite Party No.2 sent three times his service engineer but could not solve the problem. [19] Here, the Opposite Party No.2 should have warned about the chances of failure after repair. But he failed to do so. He did not take care regarding the warning and instead he was giving false hopes and suggested alternatives. This establishes the deficiency in service by the Opposite Parties. [20] The Complainant has prayed for the replacement of the said refrigerator with a new refrigerator or alternatively to get the said refrigerator repaired with no cost. The claim of replacement of the new refrigerator cannot be considered as the refrigerator is not within the warranty period. The Opposite Party No.2 is liable to repair the refrigerator of the Complainant up to his satisfaction with free of service charges. However, if any material is required to be changed then material cost to be borne by the Complainant. It is not the case of the Complainant that there is manufacturing defect. Hence, the Opposite Party No.1 is not liable to satisfy the claim of the Complainant. Hence, the Opposite Party No.2 is only liable to rectify the defects in the refrigerator. [21] The Complainant has prayed for Rs.10,000/- towards the expenses incurred by him. The Complainant has not attached any supportive documents with the complaint regarding expenses incurred by him. However, we consider that for miscellaneous expenses evidence may not be available. So we feel Rs.2,000/- is justifiable amount towards the expenses. [22] The Complainant is entitled to get the cost of the proceeding. In the circumstances, following order is passed:- ORDER 1. The Opposite Party No.2 shall rectify leakages and ice accumulation problem in the refrigerator of the Complainant immediately free of charge. 2. The Opposite Party No.2 shall pay Rs.2,000/- to the Complainant towards the expenses incurred by the Complainant. 3. The Opposite Party No.2 shall give Rs.1,000/- towards the cost of the proceeding. 4. The complaint, as against the Opposite Party No.1, stands dismissed.
| | [HONABLE MRS. Mrs.DEEPA BIDNURKAR] Member[HONABLE MR. Mr. J. L. Deshpande] PRESIDENT[HONABLE MR. MR.V.G.JOSHI] Member | | 
