GODREJ & BOYCE MFG CO LTD Vs. PRAFULLA KHATU
LAWS(MHCDRC)-2008-11-2
MAHARASHTRA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
Decided on November 18,2008

GODREJ AND BOYCE MFG CO LTD Appellant
VERSUS
Prafulla Khatu Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) BEING aggrieved by the judgment passed by Mumbai Suburban District Consumer Forum in consumer complaint No. 252/2002 decided on 10.9.2004 whereby the Godrej Company has been jointly and severally directed to pay in all an amount of Rs. 15,000 to the complainant towards compensation in lieu of replacement and compensation for harassment and mental agony suffered due to deficiency in service and also to pay Rs. 1,000 as cost, the org. O.P. Nos. 1 and 2 have filed this appeal challenging the said award.
(2.) THE facts to the extent material may be stated as under: The complainant purchased a refrigerator from the Authorised Dealer of O.P. i.e. M/s. Raja Refrigeration Pvt. Ltd., Sakinaka, Andheri on 30.7.1999. It developed manufacturing defects and O.Ps. failed to rectify the same and put it in good working order. The complainant therefore filed consumer complaint seeking refund of price of refrigerator and damages totally claiming Rs. 19,300 from the O.Ps.
(3.) O .Ps. filed written statement. According to the O.Ps. customer was given services as and when complaints were received from the complainant. The service reports maintained by the respondents amply prove this fact. The complainant took all the advantages of free services rendered by the Company from the date of purchase of the refrigerator till he asked for refund of purchase, which the complainant has not entitled after having already received services free of charge. According to the O.P. demand for replacement or refund must be made in the first instance, which he did not do. Therefore, he is not entitled to claim refund after using the refrigerator for 41/2 years since the date of purchase. The O.P. further pleaded that the refrigerator is fully repaired and ready for delivery of which the intimation was given to the complainant, but he refused to collect the same from it. According to the O.P. refrigerator bought by the complainant was covered by warranty of 12 months, which expired long back. Therefore, the complainant is liable to pay cost of replacement. The complainant opted for four years optional service contract and period of which expired after five years from the purchase date i.e. 30.7.2004. The O.P. pleaded that it rendered service under four years' optional service contract only as and by way of customer satisfaction without admitting that the refrigerator sold to the customer had any manufacturing defects. The complainant was also offered an exchange of the refrigerator with brand new one of equal quality and equal version without charging extra consideration. But, the complainant is adamant and he is not ready to act upon their advice. Therefore, they pleaded that the complaint should be dismissed with cost. On hearing both the parties and on perusing the documents, the learned District Consumer Forum held O.P./Company guilty of deficiency in service and directed to pay amount of Rs. 15,000 in all to the complainant towards compensation in lieu of replacement and also Rs. 1,000 as cost. As such, this appeal has been filed by Godrej and Boyce Mfg. Company Ltd.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.