Man awarded Rs 50,000, replacement after washing machine malfunctions in 3 months

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.

A bench of president D R Thakur and members Vijay Lawamba and Neelam Gupta was adjudicating a complaint filed by Shashi Kant Sharma against VoltBek Home Appliances Private Limited, Voltas Limited, and retailer M/s Amar Sons (Mittal), Kunihar in Solan district.

“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.

‘Failed to rebut allegations’

The commission noted that the opposite parties did not initially appear before the forum, and no written reply was filed to contest the allegations.

Although a counsel later appeared during the final stage of arguments, no evidence was produced to counter the material placed on record by the complainant.

After examining the purchase bill, warranty documents, email correspondence and legal notice, the commission found that the complainant had successfully established that the machine had developed defects during the warranty period and that his grievances remained unattended.

The bench observed that the evidence led by the complainant remained unrebutted.

Manufacturer held not liable

While granting relief, the commission distinguished between the retailer and the manufacturers.

It was observed that no expert evidence had been produced to establish the existence of a manufacturing defect in the machine.

Consequently, VoltBek Home Appliances Private Limited and Voltas Limited could not be held liable merely based on the allegations.

However, the commission found that the washing machine had been sold by M/s Amar Sons and that the retailer had failed to repair or replace it despite repeated complaints from the consumer during the warranty period.

The retailer was, therefore, held responsible for a deficiency in service.

‘Stopped working in 3 months’

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.

Story continues below this ad

Complaints, emails, legal notice

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.

Story continues below this ad

Forum orders replacement or refund, Rs 50k

Allowing the complaint on June 11, 2026, the commission directed M/s Amar Sons to replace the washing machine with a new unit of the same make and quality, free of defects, within 30 days of receiving the order.

If the retailer fails to do so, it will have to refund Rs 9,500 to the complainant. In that event, Sharma will be required to hand over the defective washing machine to the retailer.

Apart from the replacement or refund direction, the commission awarded Rs 30,000 as compensation for mental tension and harassment suffered by the complainant.

An additional Rs 20,000 was granted towards litigation expenses.

The total monetary relief awarded by the commission thus comes to Rs 50,000, over and above the direction to replace the washing machine or refund its cost.

Significance of ruling

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.