Firm told to refund cost of defective mattresses

Ramkrishan Upadhyay

Tribune News Service

Chandigarh, October 23

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chandigarh, has directed a company to refund Rs20,000, price of the defective mattress, to a city consumer.

The commission also directed the firm to pay Rs3,000 as compensation for mental agony and physical harassment and Rs5,000 as cost of litigation to the complainant.

Dr Prem Swaroop Gaur, a resident of Modern Housing Complex, Mani Majra, Chandigarh, in a complaint filed before the commission, said he purchased a pair of mattress (Kurlon New Ortho) for his wife, who was an orthopaedic patient, for Rs20,000 from M/s Bombay Collection, Mani Majra, an authorised dealer of M/s Kurlon Enterprises Limited, on November 6, 2016, having three-year warranty.

He said within six months of the warranty period, the mattresses started sagging.

He said when the issue was raised, a representative of the company checked the mattresses and replaced these with a new one. New mattresses again sagged more than 1.5 inches within a span of eight months.

In its reply, the company claimed that they visited the premises of the complainant, identified the defects and replaced the defected mattresses with a new one.

Pleading that there was no deficiency in service on their part, a prayer for the dismissal of the complaint was made.

After hearing the arguments, the commission, comprising president Rajan Dewan and members Priti Malhotra and BM Sharma, said the opposite parties (the shop and the company) indulged into unfair trade practice by supplying defective mattresses. In view of this, the opposite parties were directed to refund Rs20,000, the cost of the mattresses, along with interest @ 9 per annum from the date of purchase i.e. November 6, 2016 till its realisation.

The commission also directed the OPs to pay Rs3,000 as compensation for mental agony and physical harassment and Rs5,000 as cost of litigation to the complainant.

“No useful purpose will be served by directing the OPs to replace the product again as it has already been replaced and now the consumer has lost faith in the company’s product. If the replaced product develops the defect again, then the complainant will be put to larger harassment because he has to fight another bond of litigation, which will be highly tortuous for him,” the commission said in the order.