Consumer Commission Orders AC Manufacturer to Refund Rs 27,000 Over Warranty Repair Delay
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in Rohtak has held an air conditioner manufacturer accountable for deficiency in service and directed it to refund Rs 27,000 along with interest to a local resident. The consumer's AC remained non-functional during the warranty period due to the non-availability of spare parts.
Background of the Complaint
Sumit, a resident of HSVP Sector 3 in Rohtak, filed a complaint stating that he purchased an air conditioner for Rs 36,000 from Palika Bazar, Rohtak, in March 2021. The unit came with a five-year warranty. After about two-and-a-half years of use, the AC developed technical faults. It was covered under an extended warranty on components.
Allegations and Company Response
The complainant alleged that he repeatedly approached the dealer, service centre, and manufacturer for repairs. Although technicians inspected the appliance and identified a fault in the outdoor unit's printed circuit board (PCB), the defect was not rectified for several months. Sumit claimed that despite multiple service requests and reminders, the AC remained unusable.
During the proceedings, the company argued that the required spare part was unavailable because the model had become old. It claimed that its technician offered alternative solutions, including replacement of the outdoor unit. However, the Commission noted that the company failed to provide convincing documentary evidence to support its claims. It also observed that the manufacturer could not specify when the required spare part became available.
Commission's Order
The Commission, comprising President Nagender Singh Kadian and Members Dr Tripti Pannu and Dr Vijender Singh, held that the complainant was deprived of the use of the product due to the company's inability to repair it within a reasonable time. Observing that the AC had been used for about three years, the Commission ordered a 25 per cent depreciation on the purchase price and directed the company to refund Rs 27,000 with 9 per cent annual interest from the date of filing of the complaint.
The company was also directed to pay Rs 5,000 as compensation for deficiency in service and another Rs 5,000 towards litigation expenses. The order is to be complied with within 30 days.
