Barnala District Commission Holds Havells, Its Retailer Liable For Failure To Repair AC Despite Warranty

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Barnala (Punjab) bench of Naranjan Singh Gill (President) and Urmila Kumari (Member) held Havells and its retailer liable for deficiency in service for failure to repair an air conditioner despite it being under warranty. Brief Facts: The Complainant bought a new AC along with a stabilizer from New Jindal Enterprises (“Retailer”) and paid Rs. 42,500/- for both items. The AC, manufactured by Havells India Ltd, was assured to be of good quality and capable of reliable service. However, upon installation at the Complainant's residence, the AC failed to function. Although the broken stabilizer was promptly replaced by the Retailer, the AC remained non-operational. Subsequent complaints made to both Havells and the Retailer did not result in a resolution. Feeling aggrieved, the Complainant filed a consumer complaint in the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Barnala, Punjab (“District Commission”) against Havells and the Retailer. In response, Havells argued that the Complainant failed to provide primary evidence, such as expert or technical reports, substantiating any alleged defects in the AC. It maintained its readiness to address any legitimate issues under warranty conditions but highlighted the Complainant's refusal to allow its technician to inspect the unit properly. It argued that the Complainant's insistence on replacement, without allowing for diagnostics, contradicted its standard procedure. The Retailer didn't appear before the District Commission for proceedings. Observations by the District Commission: The District Commission noted that the Complainant did not provide any expert report or technical opinion to substantiate the manufacturing defect in the AC. However, the District Commission held that the AC was within its warranty period. Moreover, documentary evidence in the form of job sheets indicated that Havells was aware of the issues with the AC from the outset. Therefore, the District Commission held that while the Complainant did not conclusively prove a manufacturing defect through expert testimony, the AC's warranty coverage obligated Havells to rectify any issues free of cost. Consequently, the District Commission partially allowed the complaint and directed Havells and the Retailer to repair the AC and replace any defective parts, at no expense to the Complainant. Additionally, the District Commission directed Havells and the Retailer to pay a compensation of Rs. 2,500/- to the Complainant. Case Title: Kuldeep vs Havells India Ltd and Anr. Case Number: CC/79/2023 Date of Pronouncement: June 5th, 2024

Barnala District Commission Holds Havells, Its Retailer Liable For Failure To Repair AC Despite Warranty

Smita Singh

Tags