DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BATHINDA

CC.No.84 of 12-04-2019

Decided on 10-09-2019

Jashan Bansal aged about 19 years S/o Joginder Pal R/o Ward No.4, Gate Wali Gali, Factory Road, Maur Mandi, District Bathinda.

........Complainant

Versus

1.S.S. Telecom & Electronics Near Bohar Wala Chowk, Maur Mandi, District Bathinda, through its Prop./Authorized Person.

2.Mansa Electro, Chakerian Road, Guru Gobind Singh Nagar, Mansa Authorized Service Centre of L.G. Electronics India, through its Eng./Authorized person. (Deleted)

3.LG Electronics India, D-59, Site 4, Industrial Area, Kasna Road, Surajpur, Greater Noida (UP), through its Regional Officers/Manager Legal.

.......Opposite parties

Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986

QUORUM

Sh.M.P Singh Pahwa, President.

Smt.Manisha, Member.

Present:-

For the complainant: Sh.H.S Sidhu, Advocate.

Opposite party Nos.1 & 3: Ex-parte.

Opposite party No.2: Deleted.

ORDER

M.P Singh Pahwa, President

1. The complainant Jashan Bansal (here-in-after referred to as complainant) has filed complaint U/s 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against opposite parties S.S. Telecom & Electronics and Others (here-in-after referred to as opposite parties).

2. Briefly stated, the case of the complainant is that he approached opposite party No.1 for purchase of one refrigerator for his domestic use. Opposite party No.1 assured the complainant that the refrigerator of LG electronics manufactured by opposite party No.3 is best and there is warranty of one year and in case, there would be any defect, it would be removed free of costs and in case, defect would not be removable, refrigerator would be replaced with new one.

3. It is alleged that the complainant purchased LG refrigerator for Rs.60,500/- vide invoice dated 2.5.2018 from opposite party No.1. On 22.2.2019, the inner portion of body of the refrigerator started cracking near the box of vegetables which went upto upwards. The complainant immediately reported the matter vide complaint No.RNP190226035888 to opposite parties through toll free number. His complaint was forwarded to opposite party No.2, the authorized service centre of opposite party No.3. The employee of opposite party No.2 checked the refrigerator and took the photographs and also did video-graphy on his mobile handset. He disclosed the complainant and his family members that it is manufacturing defect in the inner body of the refrigerator and it requires replacement. He also disclosed that he will bring the same into the notice of opposite party No.3 and engineer of opposite party No.3 will visit the house of the complainant and check the refrigerator to do needful, but none of the employee visited his house to check-up the refrigerator. The complainant many times requested telephonically to opposite parties, but no satisfactory reply was given.

   On this backdrop of facts, the complainant has alleged deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of opposite parties. He has also pleaded that due to this act of opposite parties, the complainant has suffered from physical tension, mental agony and financial loss. For these sufferings, he has claimed compensation to the tune of Rs.50,000/- in addition to replacement of refrigerator with new new one or refund of its price i.e. Rs.60,500/- with interest @ 12% per annum; Rs.20,000/- on account of spoil of articles kept in the refrigerator and litigation expenses to the tune of Rs.10,000/-. Hence, this complaint.

4. In view of statement suffered by counsel for complainant, name of opposite party No.2 was deleted from the array of opposite parties.

5. Upon notice, none appeared on behalf of opposite party Nos.1 and 3. As such, ex-parte proceedings were taken against them.

6. Complainant was asked to produce evidence.

7. In ex-parte evidence, the complainant has tendered into evidence photocopy of bill, (Ex.C1); photocopy of warranty, (Ex.C2); photocopy of message, (Ex.C3); photographs, (Ex.C4 and Ex.C5); photocopy of legal notice, (Ex.C6); photocopies of postal receipts, (Ex.C7 to Ex.C9) and his affidavit dated 11.4.2019, (Ex.C10).

8. We have heard learned counsel for complainant and gone through the file carefully.

9. Learned counsel for complainant has reiterated his stand as taken in the complaint and detailed above.

10. We have given careful consideration to these submissions.

11. Bill, (Ex.C1) proves that the complainant purchased refrigerator for Rs.60,500/- from opposite party No.1 on 2.5.2018. This fact further proves that opposite party No.1 also mentioned in the bill that 'warranty/guarantee is by company'. The complainant has also produced on record warranty terms, (Ex.C2). It is his case that cracks were noticed in the inner part of body of refrigerator. Ex.C3, is message received by the complainant from opposite party No.3 in response to his complaint. He has also placed on record photographs, (Ex.C4 and Ex.C5) to prove cracks in the inner part of body of refrigerator. This evidence of the complainant is unrebutted and unchallenged. Therefore, there is no reason to disbelieve his evidence.

12. For the reasons recorded above, the complaint is partly accepted with Rs.5000/- as cost and compensation against opposite party Nos.1 and 3. Opposite party Nos.1 and 3 are directed to do needful to remove defects in the refrigerator.

13. The compliance of this order be made jointly and severally by both opposite party Nos.1 and 3 within 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

14. The complaint could not be decided within the statutory period due to heavy pendency of cases.

15. Copy of order be sent to the parties concerned free of cost and file be consigned to the record.

    Announced:-

    10-09-2019

    (M.P Singh Pahwa)

    President

     

     

    (Manisha)

    Member