For fire loss due to AC, Samsung, V-Guard to pay Rs 15 lakh
Manimajra woman contended a fire in the AC-stabiliser combo caused her heavy lossespunjab Updated: Apr 15, 2016 10:58 IST
Coming to the aid of a Manimajra woman whose house was gutted in a fire caused by a defective AC and stabiliser combo , the district consumer disputes redressal forum has directed Samsung India Electronics Private Limited, its city-based store Dee Kay Vision Private Limited and Kerala-based V-Guard Industries Limited to jointly pay Rs 15 lakh to the complainant.
The firms have also been told to pay Rs 50,000 as compensation to Prakash Kaur Ahluwalia for the mental agony and physical harassment caused to her.
Ahluwalia had complained against the Sector 40-based Samsung store — Dee Kay Vision — and Kerala-based V-Guard Industries Private Limited, accusing them of deficiency in services that caused her a loss of lakhs.
Prakash had claimed that she had purchased a 1.5-tonne split AC and stabiliser directly from Samsung store under a package deal of an AC and stabiliser with installation, which was offered by Samsung at an exhibition held in Himachal Bhawan, Sector 28, Chandigarh, in April, 2012.
She claimed that while she was out of station and her house was locked, the AC-stabiliser combo unit caught fire on the night of September 7, 2012, ravaging her house.
However, Samsung store officials denied deficiency of services on the company’s part, stating that the complainant had nowhere stated that the fire was caused from the AC unit manufactured by them, whereas the stabiliser had neither been manufactured nor sold by Samsung store.
Dee Kay Vision store claimed that the fire took place due to a short-circuit due to the fact that the complainant had not switched off the electricity connection, while locking the doors of the house.
“The working of the AC and stabiliser has no concern with the said fire,” it claimed.
V-Guard Industries Limited claimed that their stabiliser was of good quality and there were no complaints regarding the quality of the product of the company ever.
In its order, the forum observed that opposite parties were alone responsible for the losses that had occurred to the complainant on account of the fire that had started from one of these equipment and engulfed the entire belongings of the complainant reducing them to ashes, and therefore, they alone deserved to be held liable for being deficient in giving proper service to the complainant and having indulged in an unfair trade practice of such sale.