Applications for Deficiency of Service (for washing machine)

Updated atMarch 2010

Defective Washing Machine

In the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum

Gulbarga Collectorate, Gulbarga

Consumer Complaint No. ...... of ......

In the matter of:

A complaint under sections 11 and 12 of

the Consumer Protection Act 1986 and

the Rules made thereunder

And

Mr. X residing at ............................... ..............................

Complainant

versus

TBC Company Limited,a company

incorporated under the Companies

Act 1956 and carrying on business

at ...........................

Respondent

To The Hon''ble President and

His Companion Member of

the District Consumer Disputes

Redressal Forum

The complainant above-named most respectfully Sheweth :-

  1. The respondent is a manufacturer of electrical goods including Washing Machines and carries on business in ……………….

  2. The claim of compensation and/or redressal of grievances of the complainant does not exceed Rs.4 lakhs.

  3. The complaint relates to the malfunctioning of the Washing Machine purchased by the complainant from the respondent about16 months ago. This Application is being made within 2 years from the date of cause of action for making this application.

  4. On 15th Jan2006 the complainant purchased one Automatic Washing Machine from the respondent at Rs. 27,000.

  5. The complainant paid the price, took delivery of the machine and the respondent issued a cash memo and a Guarantee/Warranty Card guaranteeing the proper functioning of the machine. The guarantee was valid for 3 years.

  6. After about 7 days of running the said machine in accordance with the printed instructions given by the respondent the machine did not work properly. The complainant by his letter dated 25th Jan2006 complained to the respondent setting out the malfunctioning of the Washing Machine including the non-working of therinsing mechanism.

  7. The respondent sent its mechanic who apparently repaired the defect. But after some time again there was the malfunctioning of the machine since its waterdrain pipewas not properly functioning. Itsrinsing mechanism also did not work.

  8. After several reminders the respondent sent its mechanic who tried to repair the machine and ultimately made the machine workable but stated that the defect was a manufacturing one and therefore the same could not be fully repaired.

  9. The complainant requested the respondent by a letter dated 10thJune2006 to replace the said machine as there was a manufacturing defect and in spite of best efforts the respondent’s mechanic could not repair...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT