Smt. Sheela Jacob (Member):

                   The complainant has filed the complaint against the opposite party for getting a relief from the Forum.

                   2. The complainant’s case is that he had purchased a refrigerator for Rs. 15,000/- from 1^st opposite party on 28/03/2016 which is manufactured by the Samsung Company.  The warranty offered by the company for refrigerator is for one year.  The 2^nd opposite party is the authorized service center.  The refrigerator showed complaint’s of water flowing inside the refrigerator even within two weeks of its purchase.   The matter was intimated to the 1^st opposite party.  The 1^st opposite party’s technician came and checked the refrigerator.  They fixed thermocole inside the refrigerator and informed that the defect is cured.  But within two days the thermocole fall down inside the refrigerator itself and again started to show the same complaint.   Even then the said refrigerator showed complaints the complainant contacted the 1^st opposite party several times.  But the complainant’s complaint was even not rectified and subsequently the compressor also showed troubles.  Thereafter, the complainant contacted the 1^st opposite party and registered the complaint.  But there was no response.  So the complainant sent a legal notice on 17/10/2016 to the 1^st opposite party.  They received the notice on 18/10/2016.  Then the 1^st opposite party assured the complainant to replace the refrigerator or to refund the amount through bank.  So the complainant sent his Bank account number on 08/11/2016.  But so far they have not replaced the refrigerator or refund the amount.  According to the complainant the defects of the refrigerator is due to low manufacturing quality and hence opposite parties are liable to replace the refrigerator.  The complainant had sustained huge loss due to the non-supply of the new refrigerator.  The above said act of the opposite party is a clear deficiency in service which caused mental agony and financial loss and the opposite parties are liable to the complainant for the same.

                   3. The complainant had sustained total loss of Rs. 28,000/- under various heads.  Hence this complaint for the realization of Rs. 28,000/- with 12% interest along with cost of this proceedings.

                   4. In this case opposite parties are exparte.  On the basis of the pleadings of the complainant the only point to be considered is whether this complaint can be allowed or not.

                   5. The evidence of this complainant consists of the oral deposition of PW1 and Ext.A1to A4.  After the closure of evidence, complainant was heard.

                   6. The Point:-  The complainant’s allegation is that the refrigerator which he purchased from the 1^st opposite party was totally become no use due to its manufacturing defects and other complaints.  The 1^st opposite party is the dealer and the 2^nd opposite party is the authorized service center.  The 1^st opposite party’s technicians repaired the refrigerator but it was not repaired properly.  At last on the basis of the complaint of the complainant and legal notice the 1^st opposite party assured to replace the refrigerator or refund the amount.  But they have not replaced the complainant’s damaged refrigerator    inspite of their assurance.  Because of the above said act of the opposite parties, the complainant had suffered a total loss of Rs. 28,000/- and the opposite parties are liable to pay the amount to the complainant.

                   7. In order to prove the case of the complainant, the complainant adduced oral evidence as PW1 and 4 documents were also produced which are marked as Ext. A1 to A4.  Ext. A1 is the photocopy of the bill dated:28/03/2016 for Rs. 15,000/- issued by the 1^st opposite party in the name of the complainant in respect of the refrigerator in question.  Ext. A2 is the warranty of the refrigerator issued by the 1^st opposite party at the time of selling the refrigerator.  Ext. A3 is the copy of the advocate notice sent by the complainant to the 1^st opposite party.  Ext.A4 series is the postal receipt and acknowledgement card of Ext. A3 advocate notice.

                   8. On the basis of the allegation of the complainant, we have perused the entire materials on records and found that the complainant had purchased a refrigerator manufactured by the 2^nd opposite party’s company from the 1^st opposite party.  The said refrigerator was repaired by the 1^st opposite party’s technicians.  According to the complainant, even after repairs, the refrigerator was not working and now it is beyond use and out of repairs.  Further, the 1^st opposite party had not replaced the refrigerator or refund the amount in spite of the assurance given by them.

                   9. Since the opposite parties are exparte and there is no reason to disbelieve the allegation of the complainant, the complaint’s allegation stands proved against opposite parties an unchallenged.  Therefore, we find that the above said acts of the opposite parties are clear deficiency in service and they are liable to the complainant for the same.  Though the complainant claims that he had a total loss of Rs. 15,000/- due to the deficiency of service of the opposite parties he had not adduced any cogent evidence to establish the amount claimed by him.  So we are not inclined to allow the complaint as prayed for.  Therefore, this complaint can be allowed in part with cost & compensation.

                   10. In the result, this complaint is allowed, there by the 1^st and 2^nd opposite parties are directed to pay a total amount of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) to the complainant as cost of the damaged refrigerator and other costs and compensation within 15 days from the receipt of this order, failing which the complainant is allowed to realize the whole amount jointly and severally from the opposite parties with 12% interest from today till the realization of the whole amount.

                   Declared in the Open Forum on this the 30^th day of March, 2017.                                                                                                                    

                                                                                              (Sd/-)

                                                                                        Sheela Jacob

                                                                                           (Member)

Sri. P. Satheesh Chandran Nair (President)  :   (Sd/-)                  

Appendix:

Witness examined on the side of the complainant:

PW1  :  K.M. Mathew

Exhibits marked on the side of the complainant:

A1 :  Photocopy of the bill dated 28/03/2016 for Rs. 15,000/- issued by the

       1^st opposite party in the name of the complainant

A2 :  Warranty of the refrigerator issued by the 1^st opposite party.

A3 :  Copy of the advocate notice sent by the complainant to the

        1^st opposite party. 

A4 series : Postal receipt and acknowledgement card of Ext. A3 advocate notice.

Witness examined on the side of the opposite parties:  Nil.

Exhibits marked on the side of the opposite parties:  Nil.     

                                                                                                  (By Order)

Copy to:- (1) K.M. Mathew, Konnakkal Veedu, Anchukuzhy, 

                    Karikulam P.O, Pazhavangadi Village,

                    Ranni .                                                                         

               (2) The Proprietor, Mini Super Shoppe, Aronnil Building,

           Pazhavangadi P.O, Ranni.

     (3)  The Manager, Samsung Authorized Service Centre,

           Melevettipuram, Pathanamthitta.

     (4)  The Stock File.