BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM ::

KADAPA Y.S.R DISTRICT

PRESENT SRI V.C. GUNNAIAH, B.Com., M.L., PRESIDENT

        SMT. K. SIREESHA, B.L., LADY MEMBER

                                                                                  SRI M.V.R. SHARMA, MEMBER

Tuesday, 19^th July 2016

CONSUMER COMPLAINT No.  31/ 2016

Garisa Gangadhar Reddy, S/o Gangi Reddy,

Hindu, aged 30 years, Coolie work in quarries,

R/o D. No. 2-117-15-19, Mahesh Nagar,

Yerraguntla town and Mandal, Kadapa District.                               ….. Complainant.

Vs.

1.  The Proprietor, Friends Electronics and Home Needs,

     Shop 5/1, Opp. Chowdamma Temple, Muddanur Road,

     Yerraguntal Town and Mandal, Kadapa District,

     Andhra Pradesh.

2.  The Manager, Consumer Care, Khaitan Electricals Ltd.,

     46C, JL Nehru Road, Kolkata – 700071, West Bangal State.

2.  The Manager, Authorised Service Center for Khaitan Electricals Ltd.,

     Nagendra Service Center, Near Samsung Plaza, 7 Roads,

     Kadapa city, Kadapa District, Andhra Pradesh State.              …..  Respondents.

This complaint coming for final hearing on 14-7-2016 in the presence of Sri K. Vijaya Krishna, Advocate for complainant and R1 called absent and set exparte and R2 & R3 appeared as in persons and  upon perusing the material papers on record, the Forum made the following:-

O R D E R

(Per V.C. Gunnaiah, President),

1.                The complainant filed this complaint under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act 1986 (for short herein after called as C.P. Act) praying this forum to direct the Respondents to refund Rs. 11,000/- towards cost of Air cooler with interest @ 24% p.a. from the date of its purchase, to pay an amount of Rs. 25,000/- as compensation for deficiency in service, to pay an amount of Rs. 25,000/- towards mental agony and Rs. 5,000/- towards costs.

2.                The averments of the complaint in brevity are that the Complainant has purchased Air cooler of Khaitan (60 L) Thunder Desert Air Cooler KACDB60MP from R1 for an amount of Rs. 11,000/- vide cash invoice dt. 3-5-2015 the Air cooler was manufactured by R2.  The said air cooler has one year warranty from the date of its sale, as per warranty card issued by Khaitan Electricals Ltd., R3 is the authorized service center at Kadapa for Khaitan electrical Ltd.,  After its purchase the air cooler hardly worked well for a few days.  During the 1^st week of June 2015 the Complainant noticed cooling stretching u p to one foot only from air cooler and not functioning properly.  On 2-6-2015 the Complainant caused an online complaint about the problem in complaint No. 216640.  One week later the company technician came and inspected the air cooler and checked out the same and told the problem is rectified and went away but the cooling problem stretching not beyond one foot was continuing.  The Complainant again gave complaint on 26-6-2015 a few days later the company technician came and inspected the cooler and replaced water pump with new one and left saying that the cooler would be functioned well.  Even after replacement of the water pump the problem was subsisting.  The Complainant gave online complaints on 12-10-2015 and 1-1-2016 through R1.  R1 also inspected the cooler personally being dealer and confirmed the problem and assured that he would talk to the company technicians.  But the problem was not rectified.  On 01-4-2016 while the problem was subsisting, the Complainant handed over cooler to the R1 and caused online complaint.  But there is no response from the Respondents.  There is manufacturing defects in the air cooler.  Due to the problem in hard summer by not working cooler properly his children suffered and spent Rs. 6,000/- for treatment.  There is negligence and carelessness on the part of the Respondent in redressing the grievances of the Complainant.  Hence, the complaint for the above reliefs.

3.                Respondent No. 1 remained exparte.

4.                Respondents 2 & 3 filed common counter denying the allegations regarding not attending the complaints made by the Complainant and deficiency in service on their part and liable to pay compensation as claimed.  But admitted the Complainant purchased the cooler from R1 on 3-5-2015 as pleaded.  It is further averred at the time of purchasing the cooler the Complainant checked the condition of the cooler and after satisfying the condition of the cooler and purchased the same.  As and when the Complainant made complaints the Respondents subordinates attended the problem and rectified.  Due to up and down in the current supply the cooler was troubling.   On 26-6-2015 company technician after inspection replaced the water pump to the satisfaction of Complainant.  Thus there is no negligence or carelessness and other allegations regarding health problems of children are not correct due to the air cooler.  

5.                It is also averred that the cooler purchased by the Complainant is running in good condition subsequent to change of water pump but the Complainant filed this complaint with evil intention on false grounds to extract money and no deficiency in service as alleged by the Complainant.  Hence, the complaint is liable to be dismissed.

6.                On the basis of the above pleadings the following points are settled for determination. 

1. Whether the Air cooler supplied to the Complainant by the Respondents is defective one?
2. Whether the Complainant is entitled for the reliefs against the Respondents?
3. To what relief?

7.                No oral evidence has been let in by the parties.  But  on behalf of the complainant  Exs. A1 &  A2 documents are marked.  No documents are marked on behalf of Respondents 2 & 3.        

8.                Heard arguments on both sides and considered material placed on record by the parties.     

9.                Point No. 1.  The main allegation by the Complainant against the Respondents is that the Air Cooler purchased by him under Ex. A1 invoice on             3-5-2015 for Rs. 11,000/- worked a few days and in the next month problem arose regarding stretching of cooling beyond one foot and being dissatisfied with the functioning of the air cooler, he made several online complaints to the company of air cooler and also personally brought to the notice of R1, who is the dealer.   Though the technician of the company changed water pump still the air cooler not functioned well and no cooling was coming beyond one foot.  Therefore, there is manufacturing defect in the air cooler itself.  The Respondents 2 & 3 while admitting the problem in the air cooler supplied to the Complainant contended that the problems are rectified by the company technicians and the same is working in good condition, but the complaint is filed on false grounds.   However the Respondents 2 & 3 have not placed any iota of evidence to show that the air cooler problems are rectified and it is working in good condition.   If really the air cooler is working properly and stretching good cooling beyond one feet there is no need to the Complainant to approach this forum for the reliefs.  The Respondents 2 & 3 in their counter clearly admitted that there was problem in the air cooler of Complainant and as and when he made complaints, technicians attended and rectified the same.  As seen from Ex. A2 there is one year warranty to the air cooler supplied to the Complainant from the date of its purchase i.e. 3-5-2015.  The trouble arose in the air cooler in June 2015 itself and the Complainant gave online complaints several times, regarding the same problem stating that the problem is subsisting.  But it appears only on 26-6-2015 by replacement of water pump, there after the technician not attended the problem in the air cooler to rectify the defect.  If really the air cooler is in good condition and working properly without manufacturing defect, there was no need Complainant to give online complaint on 2-6-2015,               26-6-2015, 12-10-2015, and finally 1-4-2016.  So inherently it appears there is manufacturing defect in the air cooler and though the water pump was replaced, it has not been properly functioned, stretching cooling at least 2 to 3 feet.  Therefore, we hold there is manufacturing defect in the air cooler only.  More over the company technician also not properly attended the cause of Complainant to rectify the same.  Therefore, we hold there is also deficiency of service on the part of the Respondents.  Accordingly, point No. 1 is answered.

10.              Point No. 2 since, the air cooler purchased by the Complainant from R1 manufactured by R2 Company has manufacturing defect and is a defective one and the defect is persisting, the Complainant is entitled to refund cost of the air cooler i.e.     Rs. 11,000/- with interest at 12% p.a. from the date of fling of this complaint i.e.                29-4-2016 apart from Rs. 3,000/- for mental agony and Rs. 2,000/- towards costs, which is just reasonable in this case.  Accordingly, point No. 2 is answered. 

11.              Point No. 3. In the result, the complaint is allowed, directing the Respondents / Opposite parties jointly and severally to refund Rs. 11,000/- (Rupees eleven thousand only) towards cost of the Air Cooler with interest @ 12% p.a. from the date of filing of the complaint i.e. 29-4-2016 till realization, to pay Rs. 3,000/- (Rupees three thousand only) as compensation for mental agony and Rs. 2,000/- (Rupees two thousand only) towards costs of the complaint to the Complainant, within 45 days from the date of receipt of this order.  The Complainant shall return the Air cooler to 1^st Respondent under proper acknowledgement.

          Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by him, corrected and pronounced by us in the open forum, this the 19^th July 2016

MEMBER                                           MEMBER                              PRESIDENT

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

Witnesses examined.

For Complainant:         NIL                                          For Opposite parties :     NIL

Exhibits marked for Complainant  : -

Ex. A1                   Original cash tax invoice dt. 3-5-2015 issued by R1 to the Complainant.

Ex. A2                   Original warranty card issued by the company at the time of

                   Purchase of the Complainant. 

Exhibits marked on behalf of the Respondents : -   

MEMBER                                     MEMBER                                     PRESIDENT

Copy to :-

1. Sri K. Vijaya Krishna, Advocate for Complainant

                            2)  The Proprietor, Friends Electronics and Home Needs,

                                 Shop 5/1, Opp. Chowdamma Temple, Muddanur Road,

                                 Yerraguntal Town and Mandal, Kadapoa District,

                                 Andhra Pradesh.

                            3)  The Manager, Consumer Care, Khaitan Electricals Ltd.,

                                 46C, JL Nehru Road, Kolkata – 700071, West Bangal State

                            4)  The Manager, Authorised Service Center for Khaitan   

                                 Electricals Ltd.,  Nagendra Service Center, Near Samsung

                                 Plaza, 7 Roads, Kadapa city, Kadapa District,

                                 Andhra Pradesh State

B.V.P.