DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, NORTH-WEST
GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI
CSC-BLOCK-C, POCKET-C, SHALIMAR BAGH, DELHI-110088.
CC No: 880/2015
D.No._____________________ Dated: _________________
IN THE MATTER OF:
SANJAY KUMAR ASIJA S/o SH. JAGDISH RAI,
R/o 2976, 3rd FLOOR, SANT NAGAR,
RANI BAGH, DELHI-110034. … COMPLAINANT
Versus
1. SARGAM ELECTRONICS,
(THROUGH THE MANAGER),
498, KOHAT ENCLAVE,
PITAM PURA, DELHI-110034.
2. WHIRLPOOL OF INDIA LTD.,
(THROUGH THE MANAGER),
WHIRLPOOL HOUSE, PLOT No.40,
SEC.-44, GURGAON, HARYANA-122002. … OPPOSITE PARTY(IES)
CORAM:SH. M.K. GUPTA, PRESIDENT
SH. BARIQ AHMED, MEMBER
MS. USHA KHANNA, MEMBER
Date of Institution: 12.08.2015
Date of decision: 15.02.2019
SH. M.K. GUPTA, PRESIDENT
ORDER
1. The complainant has filed the present complaint against the OPs under section 12 & 14 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 thereby alleging that the complainant purchased a Whirlpool Refrigerator NEO IC495 Club IMP German from OP-1 for a sum of Rs.48,000/- vide invoice no. SPP-01176 dated 17.04.2014 and at the time of purchasing the said Refrigerator the complainant was
CC No.880/2015 Page 1 of 7
assured by the official of OP-1 that the Refrigerator is of very good quality and it will work very well. The complainant further alleged that after 3 months of purchasing the Fridge got faulty, the quick chill option was automatically on without pressing any function key and after that the complainant approached OP-1 for change of the Refrigerator but OP-1 denied for it and said that OP-1 is only for selling the product and not for replacement or repair the product and said to approach the customer care no. 18002081800 of OP-2. Thereafter, the complainant booked a complaint on customer care no. 18002081800 and within 24 hours one engineer came from the office of OP-2 and he changed a part but problem was still there and after that the complainant again booked a complaint with OP-2 and thereafter same engineer came at the premises of the complainant and informed that one part has to be changed which was not available with him. The complainant further alleged that after that the complainant made several complaints to OP-2 but problem was still same. On 20.01.2015, the complainant booked a complaint vide complaint no. DL0115011952 and service request no. 979 but nobody came from OP-2. On 21.01.2015, the complainant again booked a complaint vide complaint no. DL0115012331 & service request no.687. Thereafter, in the last week of January-2015, one engineer came from quality department (Faridabad) of OP-2 and again he said that one part is not available
CC No.880/2015 Page 2 of 7
with the company andhe sent a request to the company for replacement of the Refrigerator. The complainant further alleged that the complainant always remain in touch with OP-2 but there is no response from OP-2 and the official of OP-2 assured that the complaint no. was same and after 2 months the complainant again booked a complaint on 11.03.2015 vide complaint no.DL0315005781 & service request no.253 and the complainant approached so many times to OPs in this regard telephonically on 18.03.2015, 22.03.2015, 28.03.2015, 10.04.2015 & 15.04.2015 but of no avail. The complainant further alleged that the complainant again booked a complaint on 14.05.2015 vide complaint no. D-0415006380 and the official of OP-2 assured the complainant for replacement of Refrigerator but till today there is no response from OP-2 nor replaced the Refrigerator and said Refrigerator is still lying faulty with the complainant and there is unfair trade practice and deficiency in service on the part of OP-2.
2. On these allegations the complainant has filed the complaint praying for direction to OPs to refund the price of Refrigerator of an amount of Rs.48,000/- alongwith interest from the date of purchasing the Refrigerator as well as compensation of Rs.50,000/- for causing mental agony and harassment and has also sought litigation charges of Rs.1,100/-.
3. OP-1 & OP-2 have been contesting the case and filed their separate
CC No.880/2015 Page 3 of 7
reply/written statement. OP-1 in its reply submitted that the complainant has purchased one Refrigerator manufactured by Whirlpool on 17.04.2014 from OP-1 vide invoice no. SPP-01176 for a sum of Rs.48,000/- and the complainant was given sealed pack and new Refrigerator by OP-1 and was fully satisfied at the time of purchase and Refrigerator has also worked satisfactorily for first three months during the peak season of summer. OP-1 further submitted that the case of the complainant is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed.
4. OP-2 in its written statement submitted that the demand of the complainant to refund the price and claim compensation is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed. OP-2 further submitted that the complainant purchased the Refrigerator on 17.04.2014 and as per record the complainant has not filed any complaint with OP for any defect in the Refrigerator and as per the complainant, complainant lodged the complaint on helpline no. of OP but not mentioned the complaint no. against which he lodged the complaint and also not filed the copy of job card alongwith the present complaint, the complainant only approached OPs on 20.01.2015 and the explanation was given to the complaint but the complainant was adamant and demanded replacement only, the Refrigerator having no problem but the complainant lodged the complaint and every time explanation was given to him, OP at no
CC No.880/2015 Page 4 of 7
point of time has denied to provide its after sale service as assured under the terms of the warrantee and is still ready to provide the same and the complainant intentionally not filed/supplied the copy of warrantee card alongwith the terms of the warrantee.
5. The complainant filed separate rejoinder and denied the submissions of the OPs.
6. In order to prove his case the complainant filed his affidavit in evidence and also filed written arguments. The complainant also placed on record copy of retail invoice dated 17.04.2014 for purchase of Refrigerator Rs.48,000/-.
7. On the other hand, Sh. Manoj Kumar, Authorized Representative of OP-1 and Sh. Sandeep Sadhu, General Manager (Service) for OP-2 filed their affidavits in evidence. OPs also filed written arguments.
8. This forum has considered the case of the complainant in the light of evidence and documents placed on record by the complainant as well as the defence taken by the OPs in the written statement/reply. The case of the complainant has remained consistent and undoubted. There is nothing on record to disbelieve the case of the complainant.There is no denial from the side of OPs that after 3 months of the purchase of the Refrigerator the complainant first of all approached OP-1 for lodging complaint with regard to the fault in the Refrigerator and subsequently on the instructions of OP-1, the complainant booked complaints on customer care no. and an
CC No.880/2015 Page 5 of 7
engineer from OP-2 visited the premises of the complainant. These facts are not disputed by both the OPs in their reply as well as evidence.
9. The complainant has specifically mentioned about the fault in the Refrigerator and also specifically mentioned about service request/ complaint no. 979 dated 20.01.2015, 687 dated 21.01.2015, 253 dated 11.03.2015 and complaint no. DL-0415006380 dated 14.05.2015 and all these complaints have not been disputed by OPs. Moreover, the complainant has specifically stated that 4-5 times, engineer from OP-2 visited and many times changed the spare parts of the Refrigerator and lastly stated that the defective parts are not available. These facts have not been denied by the OPs. It clearly shows that the Refrigerator of the complainant is faulty and the defect in the Refrigerator could not have been rectified/removed by OP-2. It clearly shows that there is an inherent and manufacturing defect in the Refrigerator which was manufactured by OP-2. Furthermore, a customer is not expected to lodge complaints frequently in respect of new Refrigerator which is an item of enjoyment of life and now a days a Refrigerator has become an essential product in the life of a person/family. As OP-2 has failed to rectify/resolve the complaint of the Refrigerator, accordingly, OP-2 being the manufacturerof the refrigerator is held guilty of unfair trade practice and deficiency in service.
CC No.880/2015 Page 6 of 7
10. Accordingly, OP-2 is directed as under:
a) To pay/refund to the complainant an amount of Rs.48,000/- as the price of the refrigerator on return of the disputed refrigerator alongwith original invoice by the complainant.
b) To pay an amount of Rs.15,000/- as compensation towards mental agony and harassment caused to the complainant.
c) To pay to the complainant an amount of Rs.6,000/- towards litigation cost.
11. The above amount shall be paid by OP-2 to the complainant within 30 days from the date of this order failing which OP-2 shall be liable to pay interest on the entire awarded amount @ 10% per annum from the date of this order till the date of payment. If OP-2 fails to comply the order within 30 days, the complainant may approach this Forum u/s 25/27 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
12. Let a copy of this order be sent to each party free of cost as per regulation 21 of the Consumer Protection Regulations, 2005. Thereafter file be consigned to record room.
Announced on this 15th day of February, 2019.
BARIQ AHMED USHA KHANNA M.K. GUPTA
(MEMBER) (MEMBER) (PRESIDENT)
CC No.880/2015 Page 7 of 7
