IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KOTTAYAM
Present:
Hon’ble Mr. Bose Augustine, President
Hon’ble Mr. K.N. Radhakrishnan, Member
Hon’ble Mrs. Renu P. Gopalan, Member
CC No. 346/14
Wednesday the 20th day of April,2016
Petitioner : Rakeesh K.R
Koyickal Kalapurayil House,
Neendoor PO,
Kottayam 686 601
(Adv. Vinu Jacob Mathew
Vs.
Opposite parties : 1)Samsung India Electronics Pvt.Ltd
2nd,3rd and 4th Floor Tower C. Vipul
Tech Squae Golf Course Road,
Gurgaon Sector 43s
Gurgaon 122002.
2) Quality Service
Samsung Exclusive Service Center,
Aswathy Buildings
Erayilkadavu Road, Erayilkadavu
Kottayam-1
(Adv. P.Fazil, Jayasree Manoj ,
Jithin Paul Varghese & Priyanka M.P)
3) Lan Mark Fridge House
Panaparambil Building
Opp.Thomson Kailas Auditorium
Ettumanoor-686 631
O R D E R
Hon’ble Mr. Bose Augustine, President
The case of the complainant filed on 30-10-14 is as follows.
The complainant on 20-8-13 purchased a washing machine, manufactured by the 1st opposite party, from the 3rd opposite party, the authorized dealer of the 1st opposite party for Rs.23,300/-. The warranty of the said washing machine is one year. According to the complainant after one week the washing machine become defective and it was rectified only after one week. And in last of May 2014 the washing machine again defective, the complainant contacted the 2nd opposite party and registered a complaint on 22-5-14 as complaint No.8455977693. The technician of the 2nd opposite party, after inspection, informed that, the complaint is with regard to the board of the washing machine. And the technician came with the board only on 16-6-14, but on that day it was not properly repaired. According to the complainant he could not use the washing machine for more than 25 days within short period. So he contacted the 2nd opposite party for several times and requested to rectify the defects of the machine. But it was not rectified. Since the washing machine is unavoidable and there was not repaired by the opposite party, the complainant was forced to purchase a new washing machine for his use. The complainant used the washing machine purchased from the 3rd opposite party only for 10 months and the complainant could not use the same from last of May 2014. According to the complainant the defect is within warranty period and the act of opposite party in not repairing the same amounts to unfair trade practice and deficiency in service. Hence this complaint..
Second and third opposite party appeared but they failed to file version. The 1st opposite party has not cared to file version in time as per the provisions of Consumer Protection Act. Furthermore the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal Nos. 10941, 10942/13, New India Assurance Co.Ltd, Vs. Hilli Multipurpose Cold Storage Pvt.Ltd, categorically stated that on receipt of the complaint, the opposite party is required to be given notice directing him to give his version of the case within a period of 30 days or such extended period not exceeding 15 days as may be granted by the District Forum or the Commission, opposite party has not filed their version within 30 days or within extended period, version given by the opposite party cannot be accepted.
Points for considerations are:
- Whether there is any deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of opposite parties?
- Relief and costs
Evidence in this case consists of the proof affidavit of the complainant and Ext.A1 to A5 documents.
Point No.1
The case of the complainant is that his washing machine, manufactured by the 1st opposite party, purchased from the 3rd opposite party, showed serious complaints within short period of its purchase and the opposite parties failed to repair the same as proper working condition. And the defect is within warranty period. Complainant produced the retail invoice dated 20-8-13 issued by the 3rd opposite party and the same is marked as Ext.A1. From Ext.A1 it is understood that the price of the washing machine is Rs.23,300/-. Ext.A2 is the user manual with warranty card. In Ext.A2 it is noted that the date of purchase is 20-8-13 and the warranty is for one year. Ext.A3 is the copy of lawyer’s notice and Ext.A4 &A5 are the postal receipts and AD card respectively. Ext.A3 lawyer’s notice dated 17-6-14 issued within one year from the date of its purchase ie within warranty period. In the absence of contra evidence we are constrained to rely on the chief and proof affidavit of the complainant and Ext.A1 to A5 documents. In our view the act of opposite parties in not repairing the washing machine of the complainant in time amounts to deficiency in service. Due to the said act of opposite parties, complainant have suffered much mental pain and loss. So he is to be compensated. Point No.1 is found accordingly.
Point No.2
In view of the findings in Point No.1 complaint is allowed.
In the result
- The opposite parties are directed to repair the complainant’s washing machine in proper working condition on free of cost or refund Rs.23,300/- the price of the washing machine to the complainant.
- The opposite parties are directed to pay Rs.5000/- as compensation to the complainant.
- The opposite parties are directed to pay Rs.5000/- as litigation to the complainant.
The Order shall be complied with within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of the order. If not complied as directed the award amount will carry 15% interest from the date of order till realization. The opposite parties are jointly and severally liable to pay the award amount.
Pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 20th day of April 2016.
Hon’ble Mr. Bose Augustine, President Sd/-
Hon’ble Mr. K.N. Radhakrishnan, Member Sd/-
Hon’ble Mrs. Renu P. Gopalan, Member Sd/-
Appendix
Documents for the petitioner
Ext.A1-Retail invoice dtd 20/8/13
Ext.A2-Warranty Card
Ext.A3-Copy of lawyer’s notice dtd 17/6/14
Ext.A4-Series of postal receipts (3 Nos)
Ext.A5-AD card
By Order,
Senior Superintendent
