Posted On by &filed under Consumer Law News.

Whirlpool India Ltd has been directed by a district consumer forum here to pay Rs 37,500 to a customer for not repairing a defective timer in his washing machine, allegedly during the warranty period.

The New Delhi District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum relied on service bills issued by the multinational company, which manufactures and markets home appliances, to hold that the washing machine had a defective timer and Whirlpool had not repaired it.

“The evidence shows the machine had a defective timer which the company did not repair despite warranty of 2 years. Opposite party 1 and 2 (Whirlpool and its dealer) are directed to jointly pay Rs 32,500 to the complainant and we also award Rs 5,000 as litigation and harassment charges to him,” the bench presided by C K Chaturvedi said.

The forum also comprising members S R Chaudhary and Asha Kumar directed the complainant to return the defective washing machine.

According to the plea of the complainant, Delhi resident K D Kabra, the fully automatic washing machine he had bought from a Whirlpool dealer for Rs 32,500 in August 2009 had two years warranty.

The machine had stopped working in January 2011 and he contacted Whirlpool to repair it, he had said in his complaint adding the technician who came said its warranty had expired.

He was also told that Whirlpool did not give warranty of more than a year and was asked to pay Rs 221 for its repair.

Despite the payment, the machine could not be repaired as the timer was defective and a replacement was not available with Whirlpool, Kabra further said.

Whirlpool had submitted in its written statement that the machine in question was discontinued in 2005.

The forum, however, observed that though the machines were discontinued in 2005, they were not withdrawn from the market and dealers had old stock to sell.



Leave a Reply

1 Comment on "Whirlpool to pay for not repairing washing machine"

Notify of

Sort by:   newest | oldest | most voted
3 years 11 months ago

It Is A good decision. People would support such judicial decisions.