By Sri. Mohamed Ismayil.C.V, Member
The grievances of the complainant is as follows:-
1. The complainant purchased a refrigerator (LG GL C 292 SASX DASZEBN) fromthe shop of the first opposite party on 16/04/2019 for Rs. 25,199/- (Rupees Twenty five thousand one hundred and ninety nine only). The complainant spent additional of Rs. 2000/-(Rupees Two thousand only) for the transportation of refrigerator from the shop of the opposite party after its purchase. The second opposite party is the manufacturer of the product. It is stated that within 3 months of use, the door of the refrigerator had rusted resulting blistering of the paints. So the complainant approached the opposite parties to get redressed his grievance. On 19/08/2019, the complainant again made complaint before the opposite parties. On 21/08/2019 the representatives of the second opposite party came to the residence of the complainant and inspected the refrigerator. But no action was taken by the opposite parties. The defect was found during the period of warranty and no replacement was done by the opposite parties. So the opposite parties committed deficiency in service towards the complainant. The complainant prayed for a direction to the opposite parties to refund Rs. 25,199.99/- to the complainant as the cost of the refrigerator and also to refund Rs. 2,000/- spent for transportation of the refrigerator from the shop of the first opposite party. The complainant claimed Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty thousand only) as compensation for the sufferings of mental agony and hardship due to the act of the opposite parties. The complainant claimed another Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) as the cost of the proceedings from the opposite parties.
2. The complaint is admitted and issued notice to the opposite parties. The opposite parties appeared before the Commission. The first opposite party filed version. But the second opposite party not filed version and so proceeded with exparte.
3. The version is filed by the manager of the first opposite party. The first opposite party admitted that the complainant had purchased a refrigerator as stated in the complaint. But no complaint of rusting of the door and its blistering of the paint araised by the complainant and further the opposite party also denied the alleged complaint made on 19/08/2019. It is stated by the opposite party that claim of Rs. 57,199/- by the complainant is not correct and the complainant is not entitled for any relief. There was no inspection done by the representatives of the opposite parties as alleged and further allegation of inaction of the opposite parties are also denied. The purchase of the refrigerator by the complainant was optional and no influence was made out by the opposite party. The complainant made no complaint so far with regard to any kind of defects of the product. The complainant could have directly approach the second opposite party, but there was no such action taken by the complainant as far as the knowledge of the opposite party is concerned. According to the opposite party, if any defect is found, the second opposite party is responsible for the same and the first opposite party ready to provide any kind of service to the complainant. The complaint is filed with malafide intention to make unlawful gain by the complainant. The complainant is not entitled for any relief as claimed in the complaint. So the opposite party prayed for dismissal of the complaint with compensatory cost.
4. The complainant filed affidavit and produced documents. The documents produced by the complainant are marked as Ext. A1 to A4 documents. Ext. A1 document is the copy of terms and conditions of warranty issued by the second opposite party to the complainant. Ext. A2 document is the copy of tax invoice dated 16/04/2019 issued by the first opposite party to the complainant. Ext.A3 document is the photographs (4 in numbers) of the door of the refrigerator. Ext. A4 document is the copy of CD showing the photographs of the door of the refrigerator. The first opposite party also filed affidavit. But no documents produced before the Commission.
5. Heard the complainant and the first opposite party. Gone through all documents available before the Commission. The points considered for adjudication by the Commission are as follows:-
- Whether the opposite parties committed any kind of deficiency in service towards the complainant?
- Relief and cost.
6. Point No. 1 and 2:-
The complainant approached this Commission alleging deficiency in service against the opposite parties. It has come out in evidence that the complainant had purchased a refrigerator from the first opposite party, who was the dealer of the second opposite party. The complainant produced copy of tax invoice issued by the first opposite party showing the price of the refrigerator as Rs. 25,199/-. The copy of tax invoice is marked as Ext. A2 document. The complainant also produced copy of terms and conditions of warranty issued by the opposite parties and same is marked as Ext.A1 document. It is stated by the complainant that the door of the refrigerator was rusted resulting the blistering of the paints. According to the complainant defect is found within 3 months from the date of purchase. So the complainant claimed that the damage occurred during warranty period. Moreover it is stated in the affidavit that the subject refrigerator is became idle one and not in a working condition. The first opposite party admitted the purchase of refrigerator by the complainant. The complainant also produced photographs of the refrigerator along with compact disc showing the condition of the refrigerator. By going through Ext. A2 document, it can be seen that the price paid for the refrigerator is tallied with the contention in the complaint. Moreover Ext. A1 document also tell us about the nature warranty provided by the opposite parties to the complainant. As per terms and conditions stated in the Ext. A1 document, it can be seen that repairs and replacements will also carried out by the first opposite party from whom the product has been purchased. Moreover the warranty period is prescribed as one year. It has come out in evidence that the date of purchase of the refrigerator was on 16/04/2019 and thereafter within 3 months the defect was detected. It is also stated by the complainant that he repeatedly contacted the opposite parties to get redressed his grievances. But the opposite parties were turned down. It can be seen that the complaint is filed on 06/09/2019. So the Commission finds that the defect of the refrigerator was detected within warranty period. The complainant produced photographs and CD of the refrigerator showing the alleged defect. The first opposite party cannot elude from his responsibility by saying frivolous excuses. The defence of non availability of information with regard to the defect of refrigerator taken by the first opposite party is unbelievable and untrustworthy. Normally a prudent customer will approach his dealer of the product very immediately, if any defect was found in the product. So the Commission finds that the opposite parties failed to take proper steps to redress the grievances of the complainant. The first opposite party did not make any attempt to disprove the contention of the complainant. The opposite parties had full knowledge about the defect of the product, but at the same time they were inactive in carrying out their responsibilities. So the Commission finds that there was deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties and they are liable to compensate the damages faced by the complainant. The complainant has succeeded in proving his case and Commission finds that refrigerator is defective. By taking into consideration of long duration, the Commission does not make an order to replace the product. The sufferings of mental agony and hardship by the complainant is to be compensated by the opposite parties. So the Commission allows the complaint in the following manner:-
- The opposite parties are directed to refund Rs. 25,199/- (Rupees Twenty five thousand one hundred and ninety nine only) to the complainant as the price paid to the refrigerator.
- The opposite parties are directed to pay Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty thousand only) as compensation to the complainant for sufferings of mental agony and hard ship due to the deficiency in service by the opposite parties.
- The opposite parties are also directed to pay Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) as the cost of the proceedings to the complainant.
- The opposite parties are directed take back the defective refrigerator in its present conditions from the premises of the complainant after bearing cost of transportation and packing by the opposite parties within one month. If the opposite parties did not take back the subject refrigerator within the stipulated time the right of the opposite parties over the refrigerator is exhausted, as the complainant is not obliged to keep the product for an indefinite period.
The opposite parties are directed to comply this order within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy this order otherwise the entire amount shall bear 9% interest per annum from the date of the order till the date of realisation.
Dated this 20th day of April, 2023.
MOHANDASAN K., PRESIDENT
PREETHI SIVARAMAN C., MEMBER
MOHAMED ISMAYIL C.V., MEMBER
APPENDIX
Witness examined on the side of the complainant : Nil
Documents marked on the side of the complainant : Ext.A1to A4
Ext. A1 : Document is the copy of terms and conditions of warranty issued by the
second opposite party to the complainant.
Ext. A2 : Document is the copy of tax invoice dated 16/04/2019 issued by the first
opposite party to the complainant.
Ext. A3 : Document is the photographs (4 in numbers) of the door of the refrigerator. Ext. A4 : Document is the copy of CD showing the photographs of the door of the
refrigerator.
Witness examined on the side of the opposite party : Nil
Documents marked on the side of the opposite party : Nil
MOHANDASAN K., PRESIDENT
PREETHI SIVARAMAN C., MEMBER
MOHAMED ISMAYIL C.V., MEMBER
