Delhi

StateCommission

A/282/2018

MAN MOHAN SHARMA - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/S VOLTAS LTD. - Opp.Party(s)

26 Jul 2018

ORDER

IN THE STATE COMMISSION: DELHI

(Constituted under Section 9 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986)

                                                                                  Date of Decision: 26.07.2018                  

First Appeal No. 282/2018

(Arising out of the order dated 28.05.2018 passed in complaint case No. 458/2012 by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (East), Saini Enclave, New Delhi-110092)

In the matter of:

MAN MOHAN SHARMA

R/o 1/10771, Subhash Park,

Gali No. 2, Naveen Shahdara,

Delhi- 110032                                                                ….......Appellant

 

Versus

 

          MS VOLTAS LIMITED

Delhi Branch Office

Ist Floor, A-43,

      Mohan Co-operative Industrial Easte,

      Mathura Road, New Delhi- 110044                                   ........Respondent

                                                                  

                                                                  

CORAM

 

JUSTICE VEENA BIRBAL                 -                       PRESIDENT

SALMA NOOR                                    -                       MEMBER

 

1.             Whether reporters of local newspaper be allowed to see the judgment?                                              Yes

2.             To be referred to the reporter or not?                                                                                                    Yes

 

 

SALMA NOOR            -           MEMBER

 

 

1.                 Present appeal is directed against the order of Ld. District Forum, East Delhi in Complaint Case No. 306/15 passed on 28.05.2018.
2.             Briefly the facts of the case are that complainant who is also appellant herein had purchased a Voltas Window AC 1 ton from M/s Gupta Electronics, 13-14 at 1157/1, East Rohtas Nagar, Shahdara on 06.03.2014 by paying Rs.19,600/- in cash.  The aforesaid AC was fitted by the respondent/OP at the residence of appellant/complainant with one year warranty for the product and 5 years for the compressor. The appellant/complainant availed one free servicein August, 2014 without any problem.  The second free service was provided by the company on 28.02.2015 on complaint no. 15022800445 to the appellant/complainant.  During second free service chassis of AC was found broken.    Thereafter,appellant/complainant had lodged a complaint with respondent/OP on 02.03.2015 for replacement of the broken partwho never refused to supply the broken partbut, did not give any response.  Therefore again he contacted the OPs higher officials and was assured for replacing the chassis of AC as soon as it will be available with the respondent/OP.
3.             The grievance of the complainant is that till 08.04.2015 neither part was replaced nor any other free service was done despite repeated reminders.  Hence, a notice was issued to respondent/OP on 10.04.2015 for replacing the AC or refund of the cost of the product with compensation.  Notice was not replied by the respondent/OP. Thereafter, the appellant/complainant filed a complaint before the Ld. District Forum for replacement of the AC with compensation of Rs.30,000/-.
4.             On notice,respondent/OP contested the complaint and filed its written statement denying all the allegations about defective product.  In the written statement respondent/OP had admitted that chassis had minor crack which had nothing to do with the functioning of AC.  It was further stated that respondent/OP had called the appellant/complainant several times for replacement of chassis as the same part was not available at the time when respondent/OP received a complaint and the product was under warranty.  It was further alleged that the service man of the respondent/OP visited the residence of the appellant/complainant for replacement of chassis but appellant/complainant refused to accept replacement of chassis and insisted for replacement of AC which was running well till filing of the complaint.  It was also stated that the product was running well since its installation and no complaint was made about the nonfunctioning of the product.  As there was no manufacturing defect found, hence there was no need to replace the entire product and there was no deficiency in their services.
5.             Appellant/complainant filed rejoinder reiterating the facts as stated in the complaint.  He also filed his own affidavit as evidence on oath wherein it was stated that the chassis was broken by the service man of respondent/OPs during the second free service. Respondent/OP also submitted their evidence by way of affidavit and stated on oath that the product has no manufacturing defect.  It was submitted by the respondent/OP that they were ready to replace the chassis though it had no role in cooling process and also there was no evidence on record that product/AC had any manufacturing defect.
6.             The Ld. District Forum after considering evidence filed by the parties observed that the complaint has some merits and passed the following order:-

1. OP shall replace the chassis within 30 days from the receiving of this order and give two remaining free service as per the warranty conditions.
2. There shall be no order to cost. 

 

7.             Aggrieved by the aforesaid order of the District Forum present appeal is filed by the appellant/complainant on the ground that the District Forum had not heard the arguments of the appellant at length and also not awarded any compensation to him.
8.             We have heard the appellant/complainant in person at the time of the admission of the appeal.
9.             It is apparent from the record that applicant purchased a Voltas Window AC from the respondent/OP for Rs.19,600/- on 06.03.2014 with one year product warranty and 5 year compressor warranty. The first free service of the AC was provided by the respondent/OP on August, 2014 without any problem. During the second free service on 28.02.2015 which was about one year after the purchase of the AC, it was found that the chassis of AC had a minor crack. The greivanceof the appellant/complainant is that he had called several timesthe respondent/OP to rectify the problem but did not get any response,neither the chassis was replaced till 08.04.2015. Respondent/OP in its written statement filed before the Ld. District Forum admitted that the chassis had minor crack and the same part was not available when OP received complaint under warranty. Respondent/OP stated on oath before the Ld. District Forum stated that thereafter the serviceman of the respondent/OP visited the complainant house several times to replace the chassis but appellant/complainant did not allow to replace the chassis and insisted for replacement of AC which was running well till filing of the complaint.  It is noticed by the Ld. District Forum in its order that the appellant/complainant has failed to produce any evidence, that the said AC has any manufacturing defect or cooling defect to the broken chassis eitherduring the pendency of the complaint or till the date of argument. 
10.             As discussed above, it is our considered view that the Ld. District Forum has rightly passed the order to replace the chassis and also to give two remaining services as per the warranty conditions. 
11.             As per the contention of the appellant/complainantthat the Ld. District Forum did not hear his argument at length is not a ground to challenge the order.  However, it is mentioned in the impugned order that arguments were heard from both the parties at length. Another contention of the appellant/complainant is about granting of compensation, which has no substanceas it is the discretion of the court to award compensation.
12.             We therefore,find no merits in the present appeal.  The appeal is accordingly dismissed in limine.
13.             Copy of the orders be made available to the parties free of costs as per rules.

File be consigned to Records.

 

                                                                                                            (Justice VeenaBirbal)

   President

 

 

                                                                                                                        (Salma Noor)

                                                                                                                                          Member