Back
HIMACHAL PRADESH STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
Sunita Sharma, R.K. Verma, JJ.
J.K. ENTERPRISES, KANDRAUR — Appellant
Vs.
SHASHI PAL AND OTHERS — Respondents
First Appeal No. 334 of 2018
Decided On : 09-03-2021
Consumer Protection Act - Consumer Complaint - [Section 2(1)(g), Section 2(1)(o), Section 2(1)(r), Section 2(1)(g), Section 2(1)(o), Section 2(1)(r), Section 2(1)(g), Section 2(1)(o), Section 2(1)(r), Section 2(1)(g), Section 2(1)(o), Section 2(1)(r)] - The court discussed the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act, including definitions of consumer, complaint, deficiency in service, and unfair trade practice. The court emphasized the liability of the supplier and the manufacturer, the warranty period, and the responsibility to remove defects within the warranty period. The court's decision was influenced by the interpretation of these provisions, holding the supplier jointly and severally liable and dismissing the appeal with costs.
Fact of the Case:
The complainant purchased a refrigerator with a five-year guarantee, but it stopped cooling within three months. The supplier and manufacturer failed to repair or replace it, leading to the complaint.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the supplier and manufacturer were liable for the defective refrigerator and upheld the decision of the District Commission, dismissing the appeal with costs.
Issues: The issues revolved around the liability of the supplier and manufacturer, the warranty terms, and the responsibility to repair or replace the defective product.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the supplier and manufacturer were jointly and severally liable for the defective product, emphasizing the warranty terms and the responsibility to remove defects within the warranty period.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed with costs, and the decision of the District Commission was upheld.
ORDER :
1. Present appeal is filed against order dated 23.02.2018 passed by learned District Consumer Commission, Bilaspur in Consumer Complaint No. 130/2012 titled Shashi Pal Versus J.K. Enterprises & Ors.
Brief facts of consumer complaint:
2. Complainant filed consumer complaint under Consumer Protection Act pleaded therein that opposite parties be directed to replace the refrigerator with new one and also to pay compensation of Rs. 75,000/- for causing mental pain and harassment on the grounds that complainant purchased LG Refrigerator from opposite party No. l on 12-04-2012 vide bill No. 310 and paid Rs. 9200/- to opposite party No. l. It is pleaded that opposite party No. l had given five years guarantee on the refrigerator and if any defect occurred within one year, then it will replace the same. On 25-07-2012, the refrigerator stopped cooling and complainant visited the shop of opposite party No. 1 and opposite party No. 1 had given the mobile number of one Naresh Kumar and disclosed that he is its authorised mechanic and he will check the defected refrigerator and carry out necessary repairs. It is further pleaded that after 3-4 days, Shri Naresh Kumar visited the house of complainant and checked the refrigerator and disclosed that cooling of refrigerator is defective and cooling box is to be fitted in it, but no repair was done by him. Complainant visited the shop of opposite party No. l again and again and opposite party No. l assured for repair of refrigerator, but neither the opposite party No. l nor its mechanic repaired the refrigerator. Complainant requested the opposite parties several times to replace the defective refrigerator or to pay compensation of Rs. 75,000/-, but no action was taken by the opposite parties. Such act and conduct of opposite parties amounts to unfair trade practice and deficiency in service.
3. Consumer complaint has been resisted and contested by the opposite party No. l by filing reply, wherein preliminary objections of maintainability, jurisdiction, estoppel, complaint is bad for non joinder of necessary parties and cause of action, have been taken. On merits, it has been alleged that Sh. Naresh Kumar, authorised mechanic, inspected the refrigerator of the complainant and had found that complainant had made reckless use and mechanic Sh. Naresh Kumar had carried out necessary repairs. Complainant again lodged complaint and again authorised mechanic of the company visited the complainant, but complainant refused to get the service of mechanic. It has been alleged that manufacturer of the refrigerator is responsible for any defect and opposite party No. l is only supplier of goods manufactured by M/s LG EIL and used to sell the goods for and on behalf of manufacturer. Complainant had been requested to approach M/s LG EIL on its helpline number. It is submitted that Sh. Naresh Kumar, mechanic, had repaired the refrigerator without charging anything from the complainant. It is pleaded that Sh. Naresh Kumar again visited the premises of the complainant and he inspected the refrigerator and he found that reckless use was made by the complainant and some equipments were burnt due to the lightening, which is not a fault of the manufacturer. It is pleaded that authorised mechanic of LG company also visited the premises of the complainant, but complainant refused for repair. Prayer for dismissal of the complaint has been made.
4. Per contra version filed on behalf of opposite parties No. 2 & 3, wherein preliminary objections of maintainability, cause of action, locus standi, estoppel, and jurisdiction, have been taken. On merits, it has been alleged that there is only one year warranty on the refrigerator. It is pleaded that five years warranty was of compressor only and in case, there is complaint within one year, the refrigerator can be repaired. In the present case, evaporator/freezer of the refrigerator had been damaged by the complainant and it was not covered under warranty. Complainant has ref
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
