Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

CC/315/2014

S.Balaji - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s.Reliance Digital Retail Ltd., - Opp.Party(s)

M/s.R.Dhanalakshmi

30 Jun 2022

ORDER

Date of Complaint Filed  :15.07.2014

Date of Reservation       :13.06.2022

Date of Order                :30.06.2022

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

CHENNAI (SOUTH), CHENNAI-3.

 

PRESENT:    TMT. B. JIJAA, M.L.,                                                 : PRESIDENT

                        THIRU. T.R. SIVAKUMHAR, B.A., B.L.,                : MEMBER  I 

                        THIRU. S. NANDAGOPALAN., B.Sc., MBA.,         : MEMBER II

 

CONSUMER COMPLAINT No.315/2014

THURSDAY, THE 30^th DAY OF JUNE2022

Mr. S. Balaji,

S/o. Sampath,

No.13-A, Kollamthottam 2^nd Cross Street,

Perabur, Sembium,

Chennai – 600 011.                                                                                                                                          ... Complainant             

 

..Vs..

M/s. Reliance Digital Retail Ltd.,

Meco House,

Rep. by its Manager,

New No.47, (Old NO.11/A-1, 11/A-2),

Anna Salai,

Chennai – 600 002.                                                                                                                                             ...  Opposite Party

 

******

Counsel for the Complainant          : M/s. R. Dhanalakshmi

Counsel for the Opposite Party       : M/s. K. Ravi Kumar

 

        On perusal of records and after having heard the oral arguments of the Complainantand endorsement made the Written Arguments of the Opposite Party treatedas Oral Arguments,we delivered the following:

ORDER

Pronounced by the Member-II, Thiru. S. Nandagopalan., B.Sc., MBA.,

1.      The Complainant has filed this complaint as against the Opposite Party under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and prays to replace with the New Air Condition or refund the amount paid to settle with interest from the date of filing, i.e., 15.07.2014 and to pay a sum of Rs.2 lakhs as compensation towards mental agony and stress, deficiency in service committed by the Opposite Part and to pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- towards other expenses and litigation charges incurred by the Complainant.

2.     The averments of Complaint in brief are as follows:-

        The complainant had planned to purchase an Air Condition to meet out the present prevalent hot sun and the heat waves for his family members. He was attracted by the opposite party's products and the quality of their advertisements. On 19.09.2012 he visited the opposite party’s showroom and expressed his desire to purchase a nice long last product of Air- Condition. The opposite party shop staff explain about the performance of Reconnect Sac 1.5 + 35 Silver Rh SAG. Thus he was satisfied about the working condition of the Air Condition and its easy maintenance, he purchased Reconnect Split Wall Mounted Air-Condition by making a payment of Rs.26000/- on 19.09.2012. The Product was installed on the next day and given all the warranty and the manual of the Air Condition. On 26/9/2012  the Air Condition started some water leakage. Immediately it was informed to the opposite party shop they sent their service technicians and they said the defect got repaired. Again after a few months gap on 10.2.2013 water leakage problem occurred. The opposite party sent their service personnel and it got prepared. Same problem recurred on 17.52013, 31.07.2013, 01.08.2013 the opposite party used to send different persons from different authorised service centres. The purchase of the Air Condition in the peak of hot sun was not meted out at all. In fact the family members, senior citizens and home sick persons found it very difficult with the Air Condition. The Air Condition stopped working from 12.10.2013 to 17.3.2014, the service person who came for repair broke the panel and a new set was given but the water leaking was not stopped. He paid a huge amount as consideration but it went in vain. The behaviour of the opposite party amounts to deficiency in service. The replacement was not done by the opposite party. Only after repeated phone calls the opposite party used to send the technician to arrest the water leakage but still the problem persists. Hence, the problem occurred within a short period of purchase and the installation of the Air Condition and did not work in the necessary hours, the above said events created mental agony, problems between the family members. The opposite party therefore acted very unfair leading to deficiency of service towards the complainant. Hence the complaint.

3. Written Version Filed by Opposite Party in Brief are as follows :-

The Opposite Party Claims that the above complaint is not maintainable in law or facts of the case and is liable to be dismissed with costs. The complainant purchased an Air Conditioner-Reconnect from the opposite party. The Reconnect Air Conditioner machine is a reputed model and also fully copper coil in outdoor unit, the complainant was very particular about the said model and ordered especially the said model. The machine was installed properly as per the complainant suggested place, after a week the complainant called the opposite party to service the unit, regarding less cooling. The opposite party service person found that the new machine gas level was fine, but the opposite party checked one more time for the complainant's satisfaction. After a month later the complainant called the opposite party for service to the unit then the service person checked the gas level and topped up the gas and finished the service, meanwhile the particular complainant area (North Chennai) was mapped to a new service centre. As per the complainant's request the Engineer from the opposite party carried out the service and completed the job in the presence of the complainant and the complainant had duly acknowledged the same by signing his signature. Moreover, feedback for the broken indoor unit to the service centre which was not at the fault of the opposite party's service person. However the service centre has replaced the indoor unit at free of cost only to satisfy the complainant and also there is no documentary or expert evidence to show that the said Air Conditioner is defective one. Since the warranty cover is applicable to the complainant air condition the service was carried out at free of cost. The other services were carried out on a regular service basis. The service was carried out at the request of the customer to his satisfaction. Therefore the question of replacement of units does not arise. The complainant himself informed the service manager when he called on him over phone that they carried out the service from a third party and there is no necessity for the opposite party to extend their service and the complainant was very specific on replacement and not accepting any service from the opposite party. As the prayer for the compensation and expenses and litigation charges of Rs.50,000/- is totally unrelated to the value of the goods and cannot be substantiated in the facts as held by the Hon’ble National Commission. Hence the complaint is to be dismissed.

4.      The Complainant submitted his Proof Affidavit and Written Arguments. On the side of the Complainant, documents Ex.A-1 to Ex.A14  were marked.   

The Opposite Party submitted his Proof Affidavit and no documents was marked on the side of the Opposite Party.

5.     Points for Consideration:-

1. Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party?

2. Whether the Complainant is entitled for reliefs claimed in the Complaint and for any other relief/s?

Point No.1:-

It is not in dispute that the Complainant purchased an Air Condition Reconnect on 19.09.2012 from the Opposite Party, as found in Ex.A-1 and the same was delivered with manual and warranty, as found in Ex.A.2 and Ex.A-3 and  the said Air Condition was installed on the next day. It is also not in dispute that the said Air Condition was in fault on 26.09.2012 and the same required service for water leakage, which was within a week from the date of purchase of the said Air Condition, as found in Ex.A-4 and the repair work was carried by the Opposite Party and subsequently the same issue was found as evidenced in Job Sheets dated 10.02.2013, 17.05.2013, 25.07.2013, 31.07.2013, 23.09.2013, 01.08.2013, 12.10.2013, 17.03.2014, which were marked as  Ex.A-5 to Ex.A-12, respectively, and had not responded to the Complainant’s letter dated 14.06.2014 sent to the Opposite Party, in spite of their receipt on 20.06.2014, as found in Ex.A-13 and Ex.A-14,  which clearly shows that the issue arose on regular intervals, though attended the service of Air Condition of the Complainant on free of cost by the Opposite Party, which was under warranty for 2 years for the said issue, the Opposite Party had acted negligently in resolving the issue that existed and still in subsistence. The Contention of the Opposite party that they attended the complaints made by the Complainant and did service at free of cost as per the warranty and the Complainant had avoided their service and availed the service of third party and further there is no evidence produced by the Complainant to prove that the said Air Condition is a defective one, needs no replacement, are not sustainable. On the facts and circumstances of the instant case, this Commission holds that the negligent act of the Opposite Party by not rectifying the issue of the Air Condition of the Complainant amounts to deficiency of service and had caused mental agony and stress to the Complainant. Hence, this Commission is of the considered view thatthe Opposite Party had committed deficiency of service to the Complainant.

Point No.2 :-

As discussed and decided in Point No.1 as against the Opposite Party, the Complainant is entitled for replacement of a New Air Condition of similar Model i.e., Reconnect Sac 1.5 + 35 Silver Rh SAG  or on alternate to get refund of Rs.26,900/- together with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of filing i.e., 15.07.2014 to till date, on surrender of the said Air Condition, and entitled for a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards mental agony and stress and also entitled for a sum of Rs.5,000/- towards cost of the litigation.

In the result the Complaint is allowed in part. The Opposite Party is directed to replace a New Air Condition of similar Model or on alternate to refund a sum of Rs.25,990/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Nine Hundred and Ninety Only) together with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of filing i.e., 15.07.2014 to till date, by taking back the said Air Condition from the Complainant and to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) towards mental agony and stress and also to pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand Only) towards cost of the litigation, to the Complainant, within 8 weeks from the date of the order, failing which, the above amounts shall be recovered by the Complainant at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of the order till the date of realisation.

In the result the Complaint is allowed.

Dictated to Steno-Typist, transcribed and typed by her, corrected and pronounced by us in the Open Commission, on 30^th day of June 2022.

 

 

S. NANDAGOPALAN                      T.R. SIVAKUMHAR             B.JIJAA

       MEMBER II                                MEMBER I                     PRESIDENT

List of documents filed on the side of the Complainant:-

 

Ex.A1	19.09.2012	Date of Purchase receipt
Ex.A2	20.09.2012	Delivery Note
Ex.A3	-	User’s Manual with Warranty
Ex.A4	26.09.2012	Job Sheet
Ex.A5	10.02.2013	Job Sheet
Ex.A6	17.05.2013	Job Sheet
Ex.A7	25.07.2013	Job Sheet
Ex.A8	31.07.2013	Job Sheet
Ex.A9	23.09.2013	Job Sheet
Ex.A10	01.08.2013	Job Sheet
Ex.A11	12.10.2013	Job Sheet
Ex.A12	17.03.2014	Job Sheet
Ex.A13	14.06.2014	Copy of letter
Ex.A14	-	Copy of Postal Acknowledgement card

 

List of documents filed on the side of the Opposite Party:-

 

 

             

S. NANDAGOPALAN                                                T.R. SIVAKUMHAR                                                   B.JIJAA

         MEMBER II                                                              MEMBER I                                                       PRESIDENT