Ranga Reddy: Croma, Whirlpool asked to replace faulty washing machine or refund Rs 22,979

Hyderabad: District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Ranga Reddy has ordered Croma and Whirlpool of India Limited to replace the fully automatic model washing machine or refund Rs 22,979 with 9 percent interest.

It also orders to pay Rs 5,000 compensation for mental agony and Rs 5,000 towards costs to the complainant.

Case details

G Rajendra Babu, a government employee and a resident of Kukatpally, purchased a 7.5 kg washing machine fully automatic model for Rs 22,979 from the Croma, an authorized showroom of Whirlpool of India Limited, on January 14, 2022.

It was installed on January 17 and the Whirlpool of India Limited gave a warranty of three years on a complete washing machine and five years extended warranty only on the motor and prime mover from the date of purchase.

After two months, there was a problem. While in rinse mode, the machine observed vibration. The problem was detected for a few months. Later in August 2022, the vibration and moving of machines continued. Hence, the complainant raised a complaint on August 18, 2022, through the Whirlpool Call Center.

On August 23, 2022, the technicians visited Rajendra Babu’s house after several reminders. They said that when it vibrates, the machine should be stopped. Later the clothes should be adjusted so that they are distributed uniformly before starting the machine. The complainant interacted with the Whirlpool manager on several occasions. The complainant also sent emails and videos.

Finally, another technician visited them on December 14, 2022, to replace the power board. Ring parts were also changed, However, it was observed that the machine was running very slow. In the soak mode, the water was not filling to its capacity. Due to this, the powder was not mixing with the water and the clothes did not get fully immersed.

Dry mode timing increased to 1.50 hours due to the slowing of motor speed. Plus the machine was not washing properly despite replacing the parts.

Fed up with recurring problems, the complainant filed the complaint.

Croma filed its written version contending that the present complaint is vexatious, misconceived, false, and baseless and liable to be dismissed. The firm said the complaint had been filed only to harass the company and the complainant had wrongfully added them. Croma is not in any manner concerned with any of the alleged manufacturing defects or after-sales three services, as stated in the entire complaint. Hence, it prayed to dismiss the complaint against them with heavy costs.

Whirlpool filed its written version contending that the complainant cannot claim for more than he has agreed at the time of buying the washing machine as per the terms of the warranty. The representatives from the company have not only attended to all the calls promptly but also never denied providing after-sales service. So it cannot be said that service has been deficient on their part of them.

The firm said the claim of the complainant for refund/replacement along with damages is not proper and justified as the complainant has not filed any documentary evidence or report of an expert from the approved laboratory in support of his allegation regarding the cause of the defect in the washing machine hence, it is clear that only to extort illegitimate money and to malign its reputation, the complaint is filed.

Whirlpool also assured that they are still ready to repair the defect in the washing machine if any under the terms and conditions of the warranty but denied the manufacturing defect as Rajendra Babu had not filed any independent expert reports showing that the machine has any manufacturing defect.

After hearing the argument from both parties, the Court opined that no consumer can continuously wait for the technicians to come and repair the machine or keep attention to distributing the load quality each time between cycles of the machine after spending a huge amount on the washing machine. As per Sec.83 of Consumer Protection 5 Act, 2019 under product liability, both Croma and Whirlpool Pvt Ltd are liable in settling this dispute.