The District Consumer Commission found that a man was sold a defective semi-automatic washing machine that became irreparable within the warranty period. (AI-generated image)The Chandigarh District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission has held Thomson Homes, Flipkart and Consulting Rooms (Seller on Flipkart) liable for deficiency in service and unfair trade practice after they allegedly sold a defective washing machine to a Chandigarh consumer in 2024. They were ordered to pay the man Rs 16,999 towards mental agony and litigation costs.President Pawanjit Singh and Suresh Kumar Sardana (member) noted that the washing machine developed defects within the warranty period and could not be repaired, making the manufacturer and sellers liable for a refund.“If a product is found to have a manufacturing defect and is irreparable, the primary responsibility to refund or replace the product lies with the manufacturer or the seller. Under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, both the seller and manufacturer are accountable for defects in goods supplied within the warranty period. In such cases, the consumer is entitled to either a full refund or a replacement of the defective product. Insurance coverage, on the other hand, is supplementary and applies only to accidental damage or risks beyond manufacturing defects,” noted the July 1 order. Bought online, broke down within monthsThe man allegedly purchased a 10 kg, 5 Star Aqua Magic Double Waterfall semi-automatic top-load washing machine in black grey colour through Flipkart for Rs 9,999 on April 21, 2024. The product carried a two-year warranty and a five-year motor warranty, and was separately insured through Jeeves Consumer Services Pvt Ltd.Soon after the purchase, the machine allegedly started showing problems with its door, washer and dryer. The man alleged that he spent Rs 500 twice on repairs, but the defects persisted. Thomsonhomes eventually informed him by email on February 19, 2025 that the machine was not repairable, and offered only a partial refund of Rs 3,999.60, calculated as 40 per cent of the product’s value under its return/service assurance policy. The man’s counsel, Advocate Deepak Aggarwal, argued that the offer amounted to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice, since the man was entitled to a full refund for an irreparable, defective product still under warranty.Insurer says its role was only supplementaryThomsonhomes, Flipkart and Consulting Rooms Pvt Ltd did not appear before the commission despite being served notices, and were proceeded against ex parte.Story continues below this adOnly Jeeves Consumer Services (the insurer) contested the complaint. Its counsel, advocate Gaurav Bhardwaj, argued that the man had availed a protection plan at the time of purchase, and that its technical team had inspected the machine and found it irreparable, entitling him only to a refund under the plan’s terms, not the replacement he was separately insisting on. The insurer maintained that the man had concealed material facts and had not approached the commission with clean hands.Commission holds seller responsible, not insurerThe commission noted that the machine had developed a defect within the warranty period and could not be repaired, and that neither the manufacturer nor the seller had come forward to rebut the man’s claims. It held that the primary responsibility to refund or replace a product with a manufacturing defect lies with the seller or manufacturer, while an insurer’s role is limited to risks such as accidental damage that fall outside warranty protection.The commission directed Thomsonhomes, Flipkart and Consulting Rooms (seller) to jointly and severally refund Rs 9,999 to the man with 9 per cent simple interest from the date of payment, and pay a consolidated Rs 7,000 towards compensation for mental agony and harassment, along with litigation costs.Compliance was ordered within 45 days, failing which the amount would carry 12 per cent penal interest until realisation. The man was directed to return the washing machine to the three opposite parties, who would collect it at their own cost. The complaint against Jeeves Consumer Services (the insurer) was dismissed.Story continues below this adTakeawayA seller cannot limit its liability to a partial “assurance value” refund when a product develops a manufacturing defect within the warranty period and is found to be irreparable. Consumers are entitled to a full refund or replacement from the seller or manufacturer in such cases, and a separate insurance policy does not shift that responsibility onto the insurer unless the damage falls outside warranty coverage.For consumer-related grievances, individuals may contact the consumer helpline in their respective states and union territories (Chandigarh: 0172-270-0183) or call the National Consumer Helpline at 1915 for assistance(Written by Avinash Verma, Avinash is an intern with The Indian Express)Richa Sahay is a Legal Correspondent for The Indian Express, where she focuses on simplifying the complexities of the Indian judicial system. A law postgraduate, she leverages her advanced legal education to bridge the gap between technical court rulings and public understanding, ensuring that readers stay informed about the rapidly evolving legal landscape. Expertise Advanced Legal Education: As a law postgraduate, Richa possesses the academic depth required to interpret intricate statutes and constitutional nuances. Her background allows her to provide more than just summaries; she offers context-driven analysis of how legal changes impact the average citizen. Specialized Beat: She operates at the intersection of law and public policy, focusing on: Judicial Updates: Providing timely reports on orders from the Supreme Court of India and various High Courts. Legal Simplification: Translating dense "legalese" into accessible, engaging narratives without sacrificing factual accuracy. Legislative Changes: Monitoring new bills, amendments, and regulatory shifts that shape Indian society. ... Read More