DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION ERNAKULAM

       Dated this the 29^th day of May 2024

                           Filed on: 07/01/2020

PRESENT

Shri.D.B.Binu                                                                            President

Shri.V.Ramachandran                                                               Member Smt.Sreevidhia.T.N                                                               Member

C.C. No. 13/2020

COMPLAINANT

Radhakrishnan P.P., S/o.Parameshwaran Pillai, Puthanpurayil House, Kullayettikkara P.O., Ernakulam-680 317

(By Adv.Arun K.P., Kavya Soman, B9, 1^st Floor, V.B.Udyog, St.Vincent, Road, Kochi-18)

VS

OPPOSITE PARTIES

1. Fridgehouse Retail (P) Ltd., 30/1077A, Hospital Road, Ernakulam P.O., Ernakulam-682 011

2. Fridgehouse Retail (P) Ltd., Rep.by its Managing Director, 30/1077A, Hospital Road, Ernakulam P.O., Ernakulam-682 011

3. Fridgehouse Retail (P) Ltd., Branch Office, Rep. by its Store Manager, 37/246.B-5, K.K Road, Near Vinayaka Auditorium, Kadavanthra P.O., Ernakulam-682 020

4. LG Electronics India Pvt. Ltd., A Wing (3^rd Floor), D-3, District Centre, Saket, New Delhi-110 017

5. LG Electronics India Pvt. Ltd., Rep.by its Managing Director, A Wing (3^rd Floor), D-3, District Centre, Saket, New Delhi-110 017

(Ops 4 and 5 rep. by Adv.R.Padmaraj, Antony Joseph Mariadas, R.Ajith Kumar, KNB Nair Associates, Morning Star Building, Kacheripady, Cochin-18)

F I N A L   O R D E R

V.Ramachandran, Member

1. A brief statement of facts of this complaint is as stated below:

The complainant states that he had purchased a Refrigerator on 21.08.2019 for a sum of Rs.15,900/- from the 3^rd opposite party which is the branch office of the 1^st opposite party.  The said Refrigerator is manufactured by the 4^th opposite party and the 1^st opposite party is one of the known dealers of the 4^th opposite party.  The 3^rd opposite party delivered the product at the house of the complainant and installed the same on 22.08.2019.  The product began to function normally but shortly after a week, the Freezer of the product began to show malfunction as heavy build-up of “ICE” on both inner and outer (below) surface began to appear. The ice formation on the outer (below) surface of the freezer caused inconvenience to the complainant and his family members as the tray just below the freezer is used for keeping milk product.  The ice formation on the outer (below) surface when defrosted will turn to water and gets accumulated in the aforesaid tray.  The same then oozed out of it and drips into the inner compartments of the product and all contents put inside the said product gets wet and as time pass by gets frozen and thus become unfruitful and thus damage is caused.  The water leftover after the aforesaid process drips out of the product and falls on the floor and the complainant fears that the complainant or complainant’s family members or anybody who comes in contact with the product may get electrocuted. 

The complainant informed the opposite parties about the malfunction of the product and in response a technician of the 4^th opposite party turned up to inspect the product and after performing inspection, informed the complainant that it was caused due to a faulty sensor and it is rectified.  Unfortunately 8 to 10 days after the 1^st repair, the same issue reappeared and the complainant as usual informed the opposite parties.  Again a technician of the 4^th opposite party turned up to inspect the product and after inspection, informed the complainant that the issue is rectified.  The issue again surfaced and again the complainant informed the opposite parties about the matter.  This time a technician of the 4^th opposite party appeared and performed thorough inspection and also took photos of the freezer to send it to the concerned section of the 4^th opposite party but the issue prevailed.  When the complainant contacted the 3^rd opposite party and demanded for a replacement or refund, they directed the complainant to contact Mr.Shanavas and he replied in casual way that the complainant does not know the working of the product and advised the complainant that whenever the issue arises, just the defrost button and all will be taken care off. Therefore the complainant approached this Commission praying to issue direction to the opposite parties to pay an amount of Rs.1 lakh as compensation along with other reliefs to the complainant for the deficiency of service and unfair trade practice besides replacement of product.

2. Notice

Upon notice from this Commission the 4^th and 5^th opposite parties entered into appeared and filed their written statement of version. The opposite parties 1, 2 and 3 had not filed their version and they were set ex-parte. 

3. Version of the opposite parties

In the common version filed by the opposite parties 4 and 5, it is stated by them that the refrigerator purchased by the complainant is not a frost free refrigerator and therefore regular built up of frost on the surface of the freezer is a regular feature on the said type of refrigerator.  The presence of thermostat knob and defrost switch in the complainant’s refrigerator shows that is not a frost-free refrigerator.  The Owner’s Manual produced by the complainant himself specifically states that the refrigerator has to be defrosted every 3 days or the ice level in the refrigerator reaches defrost indicator.  It is specifically stated under the heading ‘operator procedure’ as follows:

“Defrosting : It is natural for moisture in there air to condense on the cold surface.  This leads to a regular build-up of frost on the surface of the freezer.  Defrosting regularly to avoid heavy frost building on the evaporator which results in reduced cooling efficiency.

Push the defrost knob after every 3 days/ice level reaches defrost indicator”.

It is submitted that the complainant failed to defrost the refrigerator regularly by pressing the defrost knob, which caused forming of too much of ice all over the freezer compartment and when defrosted the water overflows into the refrigerator.  This is no at all a defect of the refrigerator, but the normal feature in a non-frost-free refrigerator.  This is not at all a defect of the refrigerator, but the normal feature in a non-frost-free refrigerator.  The only remedy to avoid forming of too much ice over the freezer compartment is to defrost the refrigerator regularly may be within a period of 3 days or ice level reaches defrost indication. A complaint was received within 10 days of purchase with regard to the forming of ice in the refrigerator and the same was attended on 31.08.2019 and the thermostat was replaced with a new one so as to rule out the possibility of thermostat complaint as the reason for ice forming in the refrigerator.  The complainant was advised to defrost the refrigerator every 3 days especially when the thermostat is adjusted at high cool mode.

     The next complaint is received on 04.11.2019 of overcooling in the refrigerator and on inspection it was found that the defrost timer was stuck and it was re-settled and found working properly.  Thereafter again a complaint was received on 21.11.2019 about ice forming problem and the service engineer instructed the complainant to defrost the refrigerator regularly and also that the service engineer could not find any defect in the functioning of the refrigerator.  Earlier the complainant must have been using a frost free refrigerator and that may the reason he is getting alarmed when ice formation is found on the freezer compartment.

4. Evidence

The complainant had produced Exbt.A1 to A6 and there  is no evidence from the side of the opposite party. The complainant was also examined as PW1 and depositions are recorded. 

Exbt.A1 produced by the complainant is a copy of the bill dated 21.08.2019 from which it can be seen that a sum of Rs.14900/- was paid by the complainant to the 3^rd opposite party which is M/s.Fridge House retail private limited, Kaloor, Kochi.  The payment of the amount made by the complainant and purchased of the fridge has not been disputed by the opposite party.  Exbt.A2 is a copy of the mail. Exbt.A3 is a CD and photographs showing the status of the freezer of the fridge.  Exbt.A4 is the original of the bill.  Exbt.A5 is a complaint sent by the complainant to the opposite party.  Exbt.A7 is the photographs of the Fridge.  Additional documents 1, 2, and 3 filed by the complainant is a taxable invoices for Rs.15900/-.  The Commission has made a very thorough perusal into the documents produced by the complaint with reference to the contents of the complaint.  The version of the opposite parties are also probed into.

5)       The following are the main points to be analysed in this case:

(i)      Whether there is any deficiency in service or unfair trade practice from the side of the opposite parties to the complainants?

ii)       If so, whether the complainants are entitled to get any relief from the side of the opposite parties?

(iii)     Costs of the proceedings if any?

6)       Point No. (i)

          On going through the contention in the complaint, the version of the 4^th and 5^th opposite parties and also upon on perusal of the documents produced by the complainant it can be seen that the complainant had purchased a Fridge having price of Rs.14900/- from the 3^rd opposite party on 21.08.2019.  Subsequently it can be seen from the Exbt.A5 that the complainant had informed the opposite party on 20.11.2019 ie., just after 2 months from the date of purchase that the fridge is not working properly and had requested to replace the same.  Upon perusing the CD and photographs produced by the complainant it can be seen that there is some problem for the fridge in a prima facie observation.  The opposite parties 1 to 3 had not turned up to contest the case by filing version.  The opposite parties 4 and 5 had not produced any documentary or other evidence to substantiate that there is no deficiency of service and unfair trade practice from their side obviously there is deficiency in service and unfair trade practice from the side of the opposite parties in either rectifying the defect of the product or in providing adequate service to the complaint.  In this circumstances, point No. (i) is found in favour of the complainant and the following orders issued.

1. The opposite parties 1 to 5 shall replace the fridge of the complainant defect free fridge of the same price after taking back with existing one at free of cost.
2. The opposite parties 1 to 5 shall pay an amount of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) to the complainant as compensation for the mental agony and hardships sustained by the complainant.

3. The opposite parties shall pay an amount of Rs.2500 as cost of the proceedings.

The above order shall be complied with, within 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order failing which the amount ordered (2) above shall attract interest @ 6.25% from the date of order till the date of realization.

  Pronounced in the Open Commission this 29^th  day of   May 2024.

                                                                                       Sd/-

                                                                             V.Ramachandran, Member

                                                                                      Sd/-

                                                                             D.B.Binu, President

                                                                                       Sd/-

                                                                             Sreevidhia.T.N, Member

                                                                             Forwarded by Order

                                                                             Assistant Registrar

uk