SMT.MOLYKUTTY MATHEW : MEMBER

        This is a complaint filed by the complainant U/S 35 of the Consumer Protection Act 2019  for an order directing  the OPs to repair the defects of the TV of the complainant without collecting any repair charges along with Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation for mental agony caused  to the complainant  and cost of the proceedings for the deficiency of service and unfair trade practice  on  the  part of OP’s.

The brief  of the complaint :

    The  complainant  is working as a doctor at Taluk Hospital, Payyanur,Kannur [District].  He has purchased Samsung Q Led TV (model QA55Q7FAMKLXL) from 3^rd OP on 31/10/2017 for an amount of Rs.2,25,000/-.  1^st OP has offered an additional warranty of 10 years on ‘No screen Burn-in’ on additional payment.  The extended warranty offer was being provided by the 1^st OP.  As per the  said extended warranty offer a permanent defect in areas of  a TV display caused by cumulative effects of displaying the same screen or image for long periods of time is warranted.  On 17/3/2022 the TV started to show display defects.  The display was fading out and no image is seen after blurring for few minutes .  Then the complainant registered a complaint with 2^nd OP who is the authorised service  centre of 1^st OP.  Then the service engineer attached to 2^nd OP visited the complainant’s house and they told that the defect of the complainant’s TV display can be repaired  by paying charges as it is not within the warranty period.  The defect in areas of a TV display caused  in the screen or seen or image for long period and time is warranted for 10 years.  Now only 5 years expired and the TV started to show display defects.  But the OPs not repaired the TV with free of cost. So the act of OPs the complainant caused much mental agony  and financial loss .  So there is deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of OPs.  Hence the complaint.

         After  filing this complaint  notice issued to all OPs.  All OPs received notice and OPs 1&2  filed their written version.  1^st OP contended that if any manufacturing defect in the product the alleged defect cannot be determined on the simpliciter submission of the complainant and needs a proper analysis test report to confirm the same.  But in this case the complainant has miserably failed to prove the alleged fault.  The product does carry warranty only which means  product shall be repaired free of cost upto the period of limited period from the  date of purchase if any trouble crops up. So there is no deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of 1^st OP and the complaint may be dismissed.

   2^nd OP contended that the service engineer had visited customer’s home after taking prior appointment and during inspection he found that the panel was faulty(picture flickering) and there is no screen burn found.  The  warranty of 1stOP’s TV is one year standard warranty and one year extended warranty on panel.  10 year on no screen burn warranty.  The standard warranty and extended warranty already expired and the   reported complaint is  picture flickering.  There is no screen burn found.  For this picture flickering defect the customer has to pay as per estimate given by service centre after inspection.  So there is no deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of 2^nd OP.  So the complaint may be dismissed. 

      On 19/4/2023, the complainant filed a petition before the commission to appoint an expert commissioner to inspect the TV. The petition allowed.  The expert inspect the TV and filed a report before the commission  and marked as Ext.C1.

      On the basis of the rival contentions by the pleadings the following  issues  were framed for consideration.

1. Whether there is  any deficiency of service   on the part of the opposite parties?
2. Whether the complainant is entitled for any relief?
3. Relief and cost.

     The evidence consists of the oral testimony of PW1  and Exts. A1 to A3 and Ext.C1 were marked. On  1^st OP’s side Exts.B1 to B5 were marked.

Issue No.1: 

         The  Complainant  adduced evidence before the commission by submitting  his chief affidavit in lieu of  his chief examination to the tune of the pleadings in the complaint and denying the  contentions in the version.  The complainant  was cross examined as PW1  by 1^st OP. He relied upon Exts.A1 to A3 documents and  Ext.C1 report  also marked.  According to the complainant on 31/10/2017 the complainant had purchased Samsung Q Led TV for an amount of Rs.2,25,000/- from  3^rd OP that shows  in  Ext.A1, the tax invoice. Ext.A2 is the  2 yers warranty  certificate and Ext.A3 is the Samsung QLED TV 10 years No screen Burn- in  warranty certificate.   As per the warranty card clearly shows that the complainant is eligible for 10 years ‘ No screen  burn-  in warranty  certificate ’.  But the OPs are not  ready to cure the defects of the TV.  Then the complainant filed a petition  before the commission  to appoint an expert commissioner to inspect the TV. The petition allowed and one Mr. Bilal T is appointed as the expert commissioner.  At the time of inspection complainant and 2^nd OP is present in the TV inspection site.  The expert noted the present condition of the TV is (1) Horizontal lines are visible on the bottom side of the display screen(2) Found image  doubling and flickering at bottom  half side of the display screen(3) there is defect in areas of T.V display panel, it may be  permanent.  Moreover the conclusion of expert report is that “ the display panel of the  TV is defective and unusable”.  In the evidence of PW1 who clearly stated that Expert report(Ext.C1)  ൽ  screen burn  എന്ന ഒരു തകരാറ് TV യ്ക്ക്  ഉള്ളതായി പറഞ്ഞിട്ടില്ല? screen burn  എന്നു പറഞ്ഞിട്ടില്ല എന്നേയുള്ളൂ. Defect screen burn  ആണെന്ന് പറഞ്ഞിട്ടുണ്ട്.  On OP’s side Exts.B1 to B5 also marked.  According to the complainant  failure to cure the defects of the  TV, the OPs are directly bound to redressal the grievance caused to the complainant.  So the act of ^t OPs , the complainant caused much mental agony and financial loss.  So there is deficiency of service and unfair trade practice on the part of   OPs.   Hence the  issue No.1 is found in favour of the complainant and answered accordingly.

Issue No.2&3:

   As discussed above the OPs are not ready to cure the defects of the TV within the warranty period.  The complainant produced Exts.A2&A3 document which clearly shows that 10 year  No screen –Burn in warranty .  As per Ext.C1 report there occurred horizontal lines on the  display screen, found image ,doubling  and flickering at the bottom half of the display screen and  there is permanent defect in the TV display area.  Therefore we hold that the OPs are jointly and severally liable to cure the defects of the TV with free of cost along with Rs.15,000/- as compensation for mental agony caused to the complainant and Rs.7000/- as litigation cost. Thus the issue No.2&3 are also accordingly answered. 

          In the result the complaint is allowed in part  directing the Opposite parties 1 to 3   are jointly and severally liable to repair the defects of the TV with free of cost along with Rs.15,000/- as compensation for mental agony caused to the complainant and Rs.7000/- as litigation cost within  30 days of  receipt  of this order. In default the amount of Rs.15000/- carries 9% interest per annum from the date of order till realization.  Failing which the complainant is at liberty to execute the order as  per the  provisions  of Consumer Protection Act 2019.

Exts:

A1- Tax invoice

A2-warranty certificate

A3-10 year warranty certificate

C1- Expert report

B1- Estimation

B2- warranty card

B3- about this TV(10 year screen burn in warranty)

B4- customer service record card

B5-Tax invoice

PW1-Dr.Sunil.P.P- complainant

Sd/                                                         Sd/                                                     Sd/

PRESIDENT                                             MEMBER                                               MEMBER

Ravi Susha                                       Molykutty Mathew                                    Sajeesh K.P

eva           

                                                                        /Forwarded by Order/

                                                                   ASSISTANT REGISTRAR