BEFORE THE HON’BLE STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, MAHARASHTRA, MUMBAI FIRST APPEAL NO.FA/18/690 (Arisen out of order dated 12/07/2018 passed in Consumer Complaint No.CC/17/230 by District Consumer Commission, Central Mumbai)

Mr.Vikas V. Pathare, R/o. Flat No.9, 5^th Floor, Ratan Apartment, Chitale Path, ……Appellant Dadar, Mumbai – 400028 (Org.Complainant)

Versus

1. Vijay Sales [Mahim Branch]

Panasonic India Pvt. Ltd.

120/122 Dimple Building, L.J. Road, Mahim (W) Mumbai – 400018.

2. Panasonic India Pvt. Ltd., Regional Office, 502/503, Sahara Plaza Complex, Windfall Building, 5th Floor, J.B. Nagar, Andheri (E), Mumbai-400059.

3. Panasonic India Pvt. Ltd., Corporate Office, 12th Floor, Ambience Tower, Ambience Island, NH-8, Lane No.V40, DLF Phase III Sector 24, Gurgaon, …… Respondent Nos.1 to 3 Haryana – 122002. (Org.Opposite Party Nos.1-3)

BEFORE:

Justice S.P. Tavade, President A.Z.Khwaja, Judicial Member For Appellant : POA of Appellant- Mr.Shekhar Pathare For Respondent : Advocate Mrs.Shaila Taware Nos.2 and 3

ORDER

(30/09/2022)

Per: A.Z. Khwaja, Judicial Member

1) Appellant Mr.Vikas V. Pathare has preferred the present appeal feeling aggrieved by the order passed by the Learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Central Mumbai dated 12/07/2018 in Consumer Complaint No.CC/17/230 whereby the complaint filed by the appellant/

complainant came to be partly allowed and respondents/opponents were directed to rectify the defect and repair air conditioner and also to pay compensation of Rs.2,000/- and costs of litigation.

2) Short facts leading to the filing of the appeal may be stated as under –

Complainant Vikas V. Pathare is a senior citizen and resident of Dadar, Mumbai. Opponent no.1 Vijay Sales who is dealing with the retail business of sale of air-conditioners. Opponent no.2 is a Regional Office of Panasonic India Pvt. Ltd. Opponent no.3 is dealing with the business of manufacture and sale of consumer durables including air-conditioners. Complainant Mr.Vikas Pathare had purchased one window air-conditioner of one ton capacity on 26/11/2016 alongwith one year warranty. Complainant has alleged that after purchasing the air-conditioner and when the same was installed he found that the air-conditioner supplied by opponent no.1 was not of good quality and was emitting great noise and there was also vibration from very beginning. Complainant thereafter lodged the grievance with opponent no.1 namely Vijay Sales and they deputed a technician to look into the problem. The said technician then came and fixed rubber packing as well as wooden stiffener etc. which was purchased at the cost of Rs.2,000/- but there was no reduction in the noise and vibration. Complainant then informed opponent no.2 by e-mail on 27/06/2017 and they also deputed their service team on 01/07/2017. The opponent recommended replacement of Compressor and so the opponent replaced the compressor with the help of their service agent but still there was no benefit and the air- conditioner continue to noise and vibration. Complainant has contended that on 18/07/2017 the opponent no.2 sent a letter stating that their certified engineer did not find any technical fault with the air-conditioner which was sold to the complainant. On 09/08/2017, one Mr.Yadav visited with D.B. Meter and recorded 58.7 D.B. which was 20 % higher than given in the data of Panasonic Company. Complainant thereafter demanded replacement of the air-conditioner or refund of the price paid by him vide e-mail dtd.15/08/2017 but the opponent no.1 namely company refused to replace the air-conditioner and so the complainant was compelled to file the present complaint with a prayer to opponent nos.1 to 3 to replace their air-conditioner with new one or refund the money paid by complainant and also to pay compensation of Rs.15,000/- for mental torture and agony.

3) Opponent no.1 appeared and resisted the complaint by filing written statement on record. Opponent no.1 has taken a plea that their