Chandigarh resident harassed due to faulty AC awarded refund, ₹25,000 relief

The complainant had bought the AC manufactured by Hitachi through its authorised dealer Kabir Electronics, Mohali, on December 29, 2019

Observing the harassment caused to a Sector-7 resident and his family due to a faulty air-conditioner (AC), the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chandigarh, has directed Hitachi Home and Live Solutions India Limited to refund the cost of the machine and pay ₹25,000 as compensation.

Within months of purchase, the complainant realised that the AC had a manufacturing defect due to which it remained out of order most of the time. (Getty Images/iStockphoto)

The complainant, Jatin Sharma, 44, had submitted before the commission that he bought an AC manufactured by Hitachi through its authorised dealer Kabir Electronics, Mohali, on December 29, 2019.

But within months, he realised that the machine had a manufacturing defect due to which it remained out of order most of the time. Despite replacing the defective part twice, it still did not function properly, causing inconvenience to him and his family in the hot weather.

In its response, Hitachi submitted that after using the machine satisfactorily for more than a year, the complainant approached the commission for refund of the bill amount, which was not legally permissible.

It was submitted that the warranty policy did not contain any provision for refund and the machine was successfully repaired in July 2021 by replacing the defective part. Pleading that there was never any manufacturing defect or any deficiency in service on their part, the firm sought dismissal of the complaint.

However, the commission observed, “It cannot be forgotten that when a product is found to be defective at the very beginning, it is always better to order for refund because replacement will never satisfy the consumer, as he had lost faith in that company’s product.”

It added that if the repaired product developed fault again, the consumer will be put to much larger harassment and another round of litigation will be highly torturous.

Observing that the complainant and his family suffered a lot due to the faulty AC in peak summer season, the commission directed the manufacturer to refund ₹35,000, along with interest at 7% per annum from the date of its purchase till realisation.

It is also directed the firm to pay ₹15,000 compensation for deficiency in service, unfair trade practice and harassment, besides ₹10,000 as litigation cost.