District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Hazaribag

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Hazaribag bench comprising of Kumar Shukla (President), Anita Bala (Member) and Prem Kumar Singh (Member) held Crompton Greaves Consumer Electrical Ltd. liable for deficiency in service for selling and delivering a defective and non-functional cooler to the complainant who ordered the cooler online.

Brief Facts:

Niraj Kumar (“Complainant”) had purchased a cooler online from Crompton Greaves Consumer Ltd. (“Crompton”) for a price of Rs. 8937. However, upon receiving the cooler, it was found to be defective and not functioning. The Complainant promptly reported the issue to Crompton’s service centre, and a mechanic came to inspect the cooler, confirming the defect. Despite assurances, Crompton did not send anyone to fix the defect, and the cooler remained non-functional. The Complainant made multiple complaints to the company, but the issue was not resolved. A legal notice was sent, which also went unanswered by the opposite party. Aggrieved, the Complaint filed a consumer complaint in the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Hazaribag (“District Commission”).

The Complainant contended that the cooler he purchased was defective from the beginning and was not functioning. He argued that he had made several complaints and sent letters to the opposite party regarding the replacement of the cooler and removal of the defect, but he received no response. He claimed that due to Crompton’s deficiency in service, he faced mental agony and harassment. He sought compensation for the defective product, mental harassment, and litigation costs. On the other hand, Crompton did not appear before the commission to defend itself. As a result, the case proceeded as an ex-parte hearing against Crompton.

Observations by the Commission:

In light of the evidence presented by the complainant, the District Commission ruled in favour of him and further held Crompton liable for deficiency in service. Consequently, the complainant was granted the full claim amount of Rs 8,937, which was the original cost of the cooler. Furthermore, the District Commission ruled that a simple interest (S.I.) of 6% per annum should be applied to the decretal amount from the date of the case’s institution (October 15, 2019) until the amount’s realization.

Recognizing the mental harassment and inconvenience the Complainant had experienced due to the defective product and Crompton’s lack of response, the District Commission awarded an additional compensation of Rs 5,000. Additionally, it also ordered Crompton to pay litigation costs of Rs. 3,000 incurred by the complainant. The District Commission also ordered the complainant to return the defective cooler to the company within 30 days.

Consequently, Crompton was directed to pay the awarded compensation to the Complainant after receiving the cooler. If Crompton failed to make this payment within the specified 30-day timeframe following the return of the cooler, the complainant was entitled to receive simple interest (S.I.) at a rate of 9% per annum on the decretal amount of Rs 8,937 from the date of the case’s institution.

Case: Niraj Kumar vs Crompton Greaves Consumer Ltd.