Recurring defects in new AC, North West Delhi District Commission orders Panasonic India to pay Rs. 30k compensation


gave North West Delhi Consumer Disputes Redressal CommissionLed by Sanjay Kumar (President), Nipur Chandna (Member) and Rajesh (Member), Panasonic India Pvt Ltd was found responsible for manufacturing a faulty Air Conditioner (AC) which was inoperable despite several attempts at repair and replacement. Stayed. As a remedy, the District Commission directed Panasonic to provide the complainant with a total compensation of Rs. 30,000 to ensure dispensation of justice.

Quick facts:

Miss Reena (“Complainant”) purchased an Air Conditioner (“AC”), specifically Panasonic Model No. CUBE-ZU20NKYP, from Yash Electronic World (“Seller”), Panasonic India Pvt. Ltd. (“Manufacturer”), for Rs.24,000 after its installation on 5 April 2015, the AC allegedly malfunctioned shortly thereafter. The complainant initiated a complaint with the manufacturer’s customer care. A technician visited the complainant’s premises, inspected the AC, and reported that there was a gas leak, after which it had to be refilled. However, within a short time the AC broke down again. Additional complaints were filed with the manufacturer, however, with no resolution. The complainant claimed that the AC was still under warranty but alleged that no remedial action was taken by the manufacturer or the seller despite repeated complaints.

In response to the perceived shortfall in the response, the complainant issued a legal notice on 6 July 2015, demanding Rs. 1 lakh for the inconvenience caused and replacement of the defective AC with a new one. However, both the seller and the manufacturer failed to respond to the legal notice. Consequently, the complainant approached the District Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission, North West Delhi (“District Commission”) for redressal of his grievances.

The industrialist failed to appear before the District Commission. The seller, on the other hand, claimed that it promptly responded to the complaints of the complainant and said that there was no manufacturing defect in the AC as claimed by the complainant. The seller also pointed to the final resolution of the complainant’s complaint after which no further complaints regarding AC non-functioning were raised.

Observations of the Commission:

The District Commission has carefully examined the evidence on record regarding several complaints filed by the complainant immediately after the installation of AC. After a thorough examination, the District Commission concluded that it is clear from the entire chain of events that the complainant suffered significant inconvenience despite purchasing a brand new AC from the seller. Despite several attempts to resolve the issue, the AC remained inactive, eventually forcing the complainant to file a consumer complaint against both the seller and the manufacturer.

Consequently, the District Commission decided that merely replacing the AC would not be sufficient to provide justice in this case. Therefore, the complaint is allowed, and the manufacturer is directed to compensate the complainant with Rs. 30,000/- to cover mental agony and legal expenses.

Case Title: Ms. Raina v. Panasonic India Pvt Ltd and Anr.

Case Number: Complaint Case No. CC/1086/2015

Counsel for the Complainant: N/A

Defendant’s Counsel: N/A

Leave a Comment

“The Untold Story: Yung Miami’s Response to Jimmy Butler’s Advances During an NBA Playoff Game” “Unveiling the Secrets: 15 Astonishing Facts About the PGA Championship”