Vacuum cleaner began emitting smoke just two days after purchase, company took it for repair and never returned it; court orders Rs 3,500 compensation

A consumer in Gwalior has won a case against Eureka Forbes after a vacuum cleaner purchased through Amazon reportedly became defective within days of delivery and was never returned after being taken away for repairs.

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Gwalior, held Eureka Forbes guilty of deficiency in service and directed the company to either return the repaired product, replace it with a new unit of the same model, or refund the purchase amount. The company has also been ordered to pay compensation and litigation costs to the customer.

ALSO READ: Shah Rukh Khan’s co-star Chandrachur Singh steps out as bulldozer demolishes ramp outside Gurugram home, his calm exchange with officials goes viral. Watch

What was the dispute about?

According to the complaint, the customer purchased a Eureka Forbes vacuum cleaner through Amazon on May 15, 2024, for ₹3,699, according to a TOI report.

However, just two days later, on May 17, 2024, the appliance allegedly developed a serious fault. The complainant stated that the vacuum cleaner began emitting smoke due to overheating and that its paper sweep melted, forcing her to immediately switch it off.

Since the product was still under warranty, she contacted the company and sought repair or replacement.

ALSO READ: Germany changes sick leave policy

Multiple repair attempts reportedly failed

The complaint stated that Eureka Forbes technicians inspected the appliance and attempted to repair it by replacing the motor. Despite these efforts, the problem was not resolved.

Later, in October 2024, a company technician identified as Manal Singh Baghel reportedly collected the vacuum cleaner from the customer, assuring her that it would be repaired and returned.

According to the complainant, the appliance was never returned after that.

What did Eureka Forbes say?

In its response before the commission, Eureka Forbes denied the allegations and described the complaint as false and malicious.

The company argued that it had always responded promptly whenever a service complaint was raised and maintained that there was no deficiency in service on its part.

Eureka Forbes claimed its technicians had attended to the issue whenever required and sought dismissal of the complaint.

Commission finds deficiency in service

After reviewing the material placed on record, the consumer commission observed that Eureka Forbes had not disputed several key facts raised by the complainant.

The bench, comprising President Rajendra Prasad Sharma and Member Revati Raman Mishra, noted that the company did not deny that the vacuum cleaner became defective during the warranty period.

The commission also pointed out that Eureka Forbes failed to explain why the appliance was not repaired and returned even after being taken away by its technician.

It stated: "The opposite party has not disputed the statement made in the complainant's affidavit that the Vacuum Cleaner became defective during the warranty period. The opposite party has stated that technicians were immediately sent by it, but it has not rebutted the complainant's assertion that the technicians could not repair the product and that the Vacuum Cleaner was taken away for repair and has remained in the possession of the opposite party till date without being returned to the complainant after repair. Therefore, it is clear that the conduct of the opposite party falls within the category of deficiency in service."

What relief did the consumer commission grant?

The commission partly allowed the complaint and directed Eureka Forbes to resolve the issue within 45 days.

Under the order, the company must:

• Return the repaired vacuum cleaner to the customer at its own expense.
• If the product cannot be repaired, provide a new vacuum cleaner of the same model.
• Alternatively, refund the purchase price of ₹3,699.

Compensation and legal costs also awarded

Apart from repair, replacement, or refund, the commission also awarded compensation to the complainant.

Eureka Forbes has been directed to pay:

• ₹2,000 for mental agony suffered by the customer.
• ₹1,500 towards litigation expenses.

The payments must also be made within 45 days of the order.

Why this ruling matters for consumers

The decision serves as a reminder that companies remain responsible for addressing product defects that arise during the warranty period. It also highlights that merely collecting a defective product for repair is not enough if it is neither repaired nor returned within a reasonable timeframe.

The ruling reinforces consumer rights under India's consumer protection framework and underscores that businesses can be held accountable when warranty obligations are not fulfilled.