| Address: Eureka Forbes Limited Registered Office: B1/B2, 701, Marathon Innova, Off Ganpatrao Kadam Marg, Lower Parel (West), Mumbai – 400013 |
Facts of the Case
The complainant is a consumer of the Opposite Party and has been using a water purifier (RO) manufactured and serviced by the Opposite Party for nearly 10 years, with continuous renewal of Annual Maintenance Contracts (AMC).
The RO purifier is presently covered under a valid AMC Gold plan, which, as per the Opposite Party’s published Terms & Conditions, includes spare parts replacement and unlimited service visits.
During the subsistence of the AMC, the PCB / display board of the RO failed due to normal wear and tear, rendering the purifier partially / completely unusable.
Upon lodging a service request, the Opposite Party’s representatives initially stated that:
• The RO model is old,
• The PCB / display board is not available, and
• Replacement will not be done under AMC,
and instead offered the complainant either:
• a pro-rata AMC refund of only about 1.5 months, or
• a buyback / exchange offer of ₹1000, which is arbitrary and unreasonable.
Subsequently, the Opposite Party contradicted its own earlier stand and informed the complainant that the PCB is in fact available, but claimed that it does not come under AMC and must be paid for separately, despite AMC Gold explicitly stating “spare parts replacement” as an included benefit.
At the same time, the Opposite Party continued to make repeated calls and communications urging the complainant to renew the AMC, while simultaneously refusing to honour the benefits of the existing AMC. This conduct is misleading, contradictory, and amounts to unfair trade practice and mis-selling.
The refusal to replace the PCB under AMC, the contradictory explanations regarding availability and coverage, and the insistence on payment despite an active AMC are not supported by any exclusion clause in the AMC Gold Terms & Conditions.
Due to these repeated contradictory communications, denial of contractual benefits, and the complete absence of a consistent or fair solution, the complainant has lost all confidence and trust in the Opposite Party’s services.
In view of the above conduct and the mental harassment suffered, the complainant is no longer interested in repair, replacement, refund, or buyback, and seeks monetary compensation only for deficiency of service and unfair trade practice.
Grounds for Complaint
The Opposite Party is liable for:
a) Deficiency of Service
By refusing to provide spare parts replacement during an active AMC despite contractual obligation.
b) Unfair Trade Practice
By giving contradictory statements regarding availability and coverage of PCB and by continuing to solicit AMC renewals while denying AMC benefits.
c) Breach of Contract
By failing to honour the express promise of “spare parts replacement” under AMC Gold.
d) Mental Harassment and Loss of Confidence
Caused by misleading communications, denial of essential service, and erosion of trust.
Relief Sought
The complainant respectfully prays that this Hon’ble Commission may be pleased to:
1. Direct the Opposite Party to pay ₹25, 000 (Rupees Twenty-Five Thousand only) to the complainant as compensation for deficiency of service, unfair trade practice, mental harassment, and loss of confidence.
2. Direct the Opposite Party to pay the costs of litigation.
3. Pass any other order(s) deemed fit and proper in the interest of justice.
Was this information helpful?
Post your Comment