You are not alone dear we also face the same problem, I do not know how the people still go to them,We also purchased a brand new refrigerator of whirlpool named genius of 180 liters and it arrived defective it was purchased on 5th June 2009 at 8 PM in the evening and arrived at 10.30 PM in the night. now whirlpool is delaying the refund process they had acknowledged that their refrigerator is defective as it was not cooling at all and they replaced the refrigerator after a week long turf and verbal persuasion we as a customer had to follow up now even the replacement piece is defective they assured that they will take the refrigerator back and refund the money but not refunding the money

Dear sir/madam,

I have registered my complaint with whrilpool company but it seems that no one is
there to take care of my complaint.

I would request you to please intervene

I m forwarding you the mail trail.

Naresh Kohli (9810958489)

Doddi Druga Prasad Rao, S/o Simhachalam, Door No.28-10-24, Arundalpet, Vijayawada – 520 002.



… Complainant.



Vs





1. Big Bazar, Rep: by its Manager, Gopalareddy Road, Governorpet, Vijayawada -2.



2. Whrilpool of India Limited., Rep: by its Managing Director, 28, NIT Faridabad – 121 001, Haryana State.



3. M/s. Lakshmi Refrigeration, Rep: by its Proprietor, Authorized Service Centre, Plot No.59-7-6, Ramachandra Nagar, Opp: Stella College, Vijayawada – 520 008.



… Opposite Parties





ORDER






1. The averments of the complaint in brief are as follows :



The complainant purchased Whirlpool Refrigerator, Model No. 10866 from the first opposite party for an amount of Rs. 15,890/- on 03.12.2007. The second opposite party gave five years warranty for the refrigerator from the date of purchase which includes home care plan product contract. The third opposite party who is the authorized service center of the second opposite party collected a sum of Rs.2,350/- on 14.12.2007 under valid receipt for the additional warranty contract in addition to the cost of the refrigerator. Utter shock of the complainant the refrigerator starting troubles within two months from the date of its purchase i. e., there was no cooling instead of continuous running of refrigerator.


The technician of the third opposite party attended the same but again the same complaint was developed in the same refrigerator on 26.5.2008. The technician of the third opposite party again attended the complainant but the said refrigerator continuously giving troubles and the technician who attended the repairs informed the complainant that .a senior technician will attend the defects. Accordingly another technician came to the complainant’s house on 13.12.2008 and inspected the refrigerator and confirmed that the compressor was failed and assured the complainant that the same will be replaced within a short period.


Because of the frequent troubles in the refrigerator the complainant could not be utilized the same and he has been considered amount for purchase of the same for which no one untold mental agony besides deprivation of amount. The opposite parties sold the refrigerator having manufacturing defects beyond their repairing capacity. The complainant requests the opposite parties either to replace the refrigerator with a new one or to refund the cost of the same. But there was no positive reply from the opposite parties. Hence the complainant.



2. The first opposite party filed a counter which runs briefly as follows :



This opposite party submits that there is no cause of action against this opposite party. This opposite party is only vendor of the refrigerator of a reputed company called M/s. Whrilpool of India Limited which has been arrayed as opposite party No. 2. Without prejudice to the aforesaid preliminary objections and contentions of the opposite party No.1 and subject thereto strictly relying on the same and without waiving any of such submissions this opposite party deals with the complaint as under:



This opposite party submits that it is true that the complainant had purchased a Whrilpool refrigerator Model No. 10866 dated on 13.12.2007 and it is the product of the reputed company and it is also a packed commodity. The opposite party No.2 had given warranty of five years from the date of purchase. If there is a defect in the product the complainant has a recourse to approach the second opposite party who is the manufacturer. This opposite party is no way responsible in case of manufacturing defects in the refrigerator. If there is any problem in the refrigerator the complainant can approach the manufacturer within the warranty period. The complaint is liable to be dismissed on the ground that no cause of action against this opposite party with exemplary costs.



3. The opposite parties 2 and 3 were exparte. Hence no version.



4. On behalf of the complainant the complainant himself filed an affidavit and got marked as Ex. A1 to Ex. A4. The first opposite party filed an affidavit and no documents are marked on their behalf.



5. Heard and perused.



6. Now the point that arises for consideration in this complaint are :



1 Whether the refrigerator supplied to the complainant by the opposite parties is a defective one ?



2. Whether there was deficiency of service on the party of opposite parties ?

3. Whether the complaint is entitled for the reliefs claimed ?



7. Point Nos. 1 and 2 : As could be seen from the material on record that there is no dispute that the complainant purchased a Whirlpool Refrigerator, Model No.10866 at the cost of Rs. 15,890/- on 3.12.2007 from the first opposite party, vide Ex. A1 and Ex. A2 warranty card manual. The first opposite party took a plea that if there is any manufacturing defects in the refrigerator the complainant can approach the manufacturer within the warranty period. The third opposite party authorized service center of the second opposite party has collected a sum of Rs. 2,350/- on 14.12.2007 and issued a valid receipt No. 5227 vide Ex. A3 for the additional warranty contract (i. e., for repair charges).


In addition to refrigerator cost the said refrigerator was installed by the technicians of the third opposite party in the house of the complainant. The said refrigerator started giving troubles within two months of its purchase and the complainant had observed that there was no cooling instead of continuous running of the refrigerator. The complainant made complaint to the third opposite party, the technicians of the third opposite party attended the same. Subsequently on several dates the complainant made several complaints about the frequent troubles in the refrigerator to the third opposite party.


The technicians of the third opposite party after physical inspection opined that the compressor was failed and also there is a relay problem in the refrigerator. As all the efforts of the complainant gone futile in rectifying the defects of the refrigerator, so he filed this complaint before this Forum. After registering the complaint, notices were served to the opposite parties. The first opposite party contested the matter. The opposite parties 2 and 3 failed to contest and the reasons best known to them only.


Basing on the learned counsel for the complainant contended that the opposite parties knows about the defects of the refrigerator but failed to respond and failed to rectify the defects that means the refrigerator is having patent defects, so also latent defects if not what prevented the second opposite party (manufacturer) and the third opposite party (authorized service center) not to contest the matter or even after notices of this Forum. So the acts of the opposite parties clinchingly show that the refrigerator supplied to the complainant is a defective one. Since there is no rebuttal evidence whatsoever. Further more the opposite parties failed to rectify the defects, as such the acts of the opposite parties clearly falls within the purview of deficiency in service and accordingly these points are answered.



8. In view of our findings in point Nos. 1 and 2 that the first opposite party supplied a defective refrigerator to the complainant and the third opposite party collected a sum of Rs.2,350/- under Ex. A3 vide additional warranty contract in addition to the refrigerator cost from the complainant. So much so the allegations leveled against the opposite parties are all true. Further the material discloses that the refrigerator is having patent defects. So selling of defective goods amounts to unfair trade practice and non rectifying the defective goods amounts to deficiency in service. So there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. So the complainant is entitled for the reliefs claimed.



9. Point No.3: In the result the complaint is allowed and the first opposite party is hereby directed to replace the defective refrigerator with new refrigerator of the same model by taking back the old defective refrigerator or in the alternative pay its value of Rs.15,890/- to the complainant, and the third opposite party is directed to return an amount of Rs. 2,350/- under Ex. A3 repair charges to the complainant. Further all the opposite parties are (jointly and severally) directed to pay an amount of Rs.1,000/- towards compensation and do pay an amount of Rs, 1,000/- towards costs to the complainant. The first opposite party is at liberty to get a new refrigerator of the same quality and make from its manufacturer i. e., the opposite party No.2, after complying this order. Rest of the claims if any, claimed by the complainant are hereby rejected. Time for the compliance one month.