Amritsar Consumer Commission Orders Home Centre To Replace Almirah For Defective Supply
The Amritsar Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, comprising Mr. Jagdishwar Kumar Chopra (President) and Ms. Mandeep Kaur (Member), allowed a consumer complaint against Home Centre, holding that the supply of a defective almirah and the failure to rectify the defects amounted to deficiency in service. Brief Facts The complainant, Dr. Karan Grewal, purchased a cupboard/almirah...
The Amritsar Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, comprising Mr. Jagdishwar Kumar Chopra (President) and Ms. Mandeep Kaur (Member), allowed a consumer complaint against Home Centre, holding that the supply of a defective almirah and the failure to rectify the defects amounted to deficiency in service.
Brief Facts
The complainant, Dr. Karan Grewal, purchased a cupboard/almirah worth ₹1,17,900 from Home Centre on 21 July 2020. The product was delivered in packed condition on 8 September 2020.
When company carpenters visited the complainant's premises on 18 September 2020 for installation, it was found that incorrect doors had been supplied. During the installation process, the almirah allegedly suffered scratches and could not be installed properly.
Despite subsequent visits and assurances of replacement, the cupboard remained uninstalled and unusable. The complainant repeatedly contacted the opposite parties through emails and also issued a legal notice; however, no effective resolution was provided. Aggrieved by the inaction of Home Centre, the complainant approached the Consumer Commission.
Contentions of Home Centre
Home Centre contended that the wardrobe had been selected by the complainant from online options and that installation was carried out by company carpenters.
It was argued that although doors of the same side were initially delivered, the correct doors were later supplied and installed on 1 October 2020 in the presence of a customer service representative, after which the complainant had allegedly expressed satisfaction. The opposite parties further submitted that there was no manufacturing defect, and that the complainant subsequently sought refund merely on grounds of dissatisfaction and alleged instability.
Decision of the Commission
Relying on the settled principle that where two plausible views are possible, the one favouring the consumer must prevail, the Commission held that the Opposite Party had supplied a defective product and failed to provide effective service despite repeated opportunities for rectification.
The Commission observed that the complainant, despite having paid a substantial amount, was deprived of the use of the cupboard and was compelled to undergo prolonged litigation.
Accordingly, the Amritsar Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission allowed the complaint and directed Home Centre to replace the almirah with a new one of the same make and model or an upgraded model, subject to payment of any price difference by the complainant. The Commission further awarded ₹10,000 as compensation for mental harassment and ₹3,000 towards litigation costs.
Case Details
Case Title: Dr. Karan Grewal v. Home Centre
Consumer Complaint No.: 47 of 2021