Bangalore District Commission Holds Eureka Forbes Liable For Failing To Rectify Defective Vacuum Cleaner Despite Warranty

The Additional District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I, Bangalore (Karnataka) bench of B. Narayanappa (President), Jyothi N (Member) and Sharavathi S.M. (Member) held Eureka Forbes liable for deficiency in services failing to rectify issues with a defective vacuum cleaner, even when the period of warranty was ongoing. Brief Facts: The Complainant purchased a new Vacuum Cleaner from Eureka Forbes. The sales representative of Eureka Forbes recommended the vacuum cleaner due to the Complainant's spouse suffering from liver and kidney diseases, necessitating a high level of hygiene at home. The equipment was under warranty. However, the vacuum cleaner ceased to operate. The Complainant promptly raised a service request with Eureka Forbes. Subsequently, Eureka Forbes's representative visited the Complainant's residence and assured service but failed to follow through. Despite the Complainant's repeated reminders, Eureka Forbes did not repair the defects or provide a refund for the faulty equipment. Feeling aggrieved, the Complainant filed a consumer complaint in the Additional District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I, Bangalore, Karnataka (“District Commission”). Eureka Forbes didn't appear before the District Commission for proceedings. Observations by the District Commission: The District Commission noted that despite the Complainant's efforts to rectify the defects through repeated complaints, Eureka Forbes failed to respond or address the issue satisfactorily. It noted that the purchase was influenced by the recommendation of Eureka Forbes's representative for high hygiene standards at home due to the Complainant's spouse being a liver transplant recipient. Therefore, the District Commission held Eureka Forbes liable for deficiency in services. Consequently, the District Commission directed Eureka Forbes to refund the full purchase amount of Rs. 14,790/- to the Complainant along with simple interest. It was also directed to pay a compensation of Rs. 3,000/- for the inconvenience caused and to reimburse litigation costs of Rs. 2,000/- to the Complainant. Case Title: Ashok Kumar Rangaswami vs M/s. Eureka Forbes Limited Case Number: Consumer Complaint No. 52/2024 Date of Order: 20.06.2024Click Here To Read/DownloadOrder

Bangalore District Commission Holds Eureka Forbes Liable For Failing To Rectify Defective Vacuum Cleaner Despite Warranty

Smita Singh

Tags