Consumer Rs 50000 Replacement Washing Machine Malfunction 3 Month

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in Himachal Pradesh’s Una has awarded Rs 50,000 in compensation and litigation costs to a man who spent nearly four years pursuing action over a washing machine that allegedly developed faults within months of purchase and remained unrepaired despite repeated complaints.

The commission also directed the retailer to replace the defective machine or refund its purchase price of Rs 9,500, holding it liable for deficiency in service.

“Despite the request made by complainant, opposite party No 3 (M/s Amar Sons) has failed to repair the machine or replace the same, which is a deficiency in service on behalf of opposite party No 3 (M/s Amar Sons) and complainant is entitled to the claim,” the commission said on June 11, allowing the complaint.

According to the complaint, Sharma purchased a VoltBeko 7-kg washing machine, described in the records as a Tata product, from M/s Amar Sons on June 16, 2022, for Rs 9,500. The appliance came with a two-year warranty.

The consumer alleged that within about three months of the purchase, the washing machine began malfunctioning. He claimed that the spinner was not working and that the machine was also giving electric shocks.

Sharma said he immediately informed the retailer about the defects and was assured that the issues would be resolved. However, despite repeated follow-ups, no repair work was carried out.

The complainant told the commission that he made several attempts to get the machine repaired and even received a message stating that his complaint had been resolved, though no technician had visited. Meanwhile, the defects persisted.

Court records show that Sharma also sent an email complaint on February 1, 2024, while the machine was still under warranty. He later served a legal notice upon the parties, seeking repair or replacement of the appliance.

Despite these efforts, he alleged, neither the retailer nor the company took any effective steps to rectify the defects.

The consumer further submitted that he had to make repeated visits to the retailer’s shop and suffered inconvenience, harassment, and mental distress due to the unresolved issue.

The ruling underscores that sellers cannot ignore warranty obligations after making assurances to consumers at the time of sale.

The commission’s decision also highlights that retailers can be held accountable when they fail to address complaints relating to defective products, particularly when consumers continue to seek assistance within the warranty period.

For consumer-related grievances, individuals may contact the consumer helpline in their respective states (Himachal Pradesh helpline: 1800-180-8087) or call the National Consumer Helpline at 1915 for assistance.

Vineet Upadhyay is an Assistant Editor with The Indian Express, where he leads specialized coverage of the Indian judicial system. Expertise Specialized Legal Authority: Vineet has spent the better part of his career analyzing the intricacies of the law. His expertise lies in "demystifying" judgments from the Supreme Court of India, various High Courts, and District Courts. His reporting covers a vast spectrum of legal issues, including: Constitutional & Civil Rights: Reporting on landmark rulings regarding privacy, equality, and state accountability. Criminal Justice & Enforcement: Detailed coverage of high-profile cases involving the Enforcement Directorate (ED), NIA, and POCSO matters. Consumer Rights & Environmental Law: Authoritative pieces on medical negligence compensation, environmental protection (such as the "living person" status of rivers), and labor rights. Over a Decade of Professional Experience: Prior to joining The Indian Express, he served as a Principal Correspondent/Legal Reporter for The Times of India and held significant roles at The New Indian Express. His tenure has seen him report from critical legal hubs, including Delhi and Uttarakhand. ... Read More