VOLTAS LTD Vs. D R CHAVDA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal by the original opposite party against whom the order has been passed by the District Forum to replace the refrigerator by giving a new refrigerator of the same kind and quality. The order appears to have been passed in the year 1991. The complainant is out of use of the refrigerator till today. The refrigerator was purchased on 20.1.88 and according to the finding of the District Forum it had developed leakage on 10.10.88. It was repaired also but the defect could not be removed. The compressor was required to be replaced on 4.3.88 but it started leaking on 10.10.88 and was sent to the local dealer and it was lying there since 19 months. After considering all evidence on record, the fact that the new refrigerator started leaking and the compressor was required to be changed within two months and thereafter the fact that it started leaking, the District Forum came to the conclusion that the freeze was found to be defective within a period of about 3 months and the main part of the refrigerator viz. Freezer was required to be changed which has also developed leak after about 8 months which is the result of defective manufacturing of the freezer. It is not disputed that the complainant had purchased new refrigerator and if the compressor is required to be changed within two months the burden is heavily cast upon the opponent to prove that it was duly tested and for change of the compressor and leakage the company has not called any expert to give evidence which could have easily given by them to prove that the defect shown by the complainant was on account of his mishandling. Generally, a person who purchases a new refrigerator which is highly priced, will not mishandle it. The refrigerator is an appliance which is to be put at a fixed place and it is not just like a vehicle which can be handled roughly. Generally, a refrigerator gives a service exceeding 15 years. The company has nowhere pointed out as to how this type of defect occurs. In the instant case we do not find any error committed by the District Forum in arriving at the conclusion after appreciating the facts and arguments of both the parties. The argument of the opposite party is that since the defect has occurred, it is covered under the guarantee and they can repair it and as a matter of fact, the refrigerator has been repaired also. But being second hand it cannot fetch the same price. To our opinion that is exactly the argument of the complainant that when he had purchased the new refrigerator, it required change of compressor within two months and leakage in the cooling system appeared which might occur any time again and such a refrigerator cannot be said to be a sound refrigerator since it has some inherent defect of leakage. To our opinion there is substance in the argument of the complainant and when the District Forum has arrived at this conclusion, we cannot find any error committed by the District Forum. However, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we are not inclined to award any other damages to the complainant. We, therefore, dismiss the appeal.

(2.) THE appeal is dismissed. The appellant -opposite party shall replace a new refrigerator of the same model or higher model, if the same model is not available, which shall be free from any manufacturing defect with usual guarantee within 1 month from today since summer season is approaching so that he can utilise the same for his family. The respondent -complainant is also entitled for the cost which we quantify at Rs. 300/ -. Appeal dismissed.