Date of Filing:27.08.2019 Date of Order:25.09.2020 BEFORE THE BANGALORE I ADDITIONAL DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SHANTHINAGAR BANGALORE - 27. Dated: 25TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2020 PRESENT SRI.H.R. SRINIVAS, B.Sc., LL.B. Retd. Prl. District & Sessions Judge And PRESIDENT MRS.SHARAVATHI S.M., B.A., LL.B., MEMBER COMPLAINT NO.1364/2019 COMPLAINANT : | | Sri.Glen Williams, S/o. late. Lt.Col P.J.Williams, Aged about 63 years, M/s PH4, Food and Beverage Pvt. Ltd., 297, 100 feet Road, Bangalore 560 038. and R/at No.8, Sona Palace, Norries Road, Richmond Town, Bangalore 560 025. | |
Vs OPPOSITE PARTIES: | 1 | The Managing Director, M/s Dell India Pvt. Ltd., New Dell International Services India Pvt. Ltd., No.12/1, 12/2A, 13/A, Divyashree Greems, Koramangala Inner Ring Road, Challaghatta Village, Varthur Hobli, Bengaluru 560 036. (Exparte) | | | 2 | J.D.Impex, G-002, 5th Avenue Brigade Road, Bangalore 560 001. GSTIN?UN 29AAZHS 582531ZE Karnataka code 29, By Sri Mubarak. (Exparte) |
| | |
| | |
ORDER
BY SRI.H.R.SRINIVAS, PRESIDENT.
This is the Complaint filed by the Complainant U/S Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act 1986, against the Opposite Parties (herein referred in short as O.Ps) alleging the deficiency in service in selling a defective laptop and not repairing it properly and for replacement of the laptop with new one and to order for compensation of Rs.4,00,000/- and cost and for other reliefs as the Commission deems fit.
2. The brief facts of the complaint are that;
The complainant purchased the laptop Dell INS 3567(13/4/ITB/2GB/WIN10) by paying Rs.40,990/- manufactured by OP1 sold by OP2. It has some defects and the same was complained to one Sawan Kumar through email on 07.10.2018. It was informed that within two or three working days their technician would reach the site. They examined and replaced some parts. In spite of it, it did not work properly. Again the same was informed to OP2 on 16.10.2018. Complainant also complained to OP1 and the DELL support system sent instructions and the staff of OP1 took the said laptop on 01.01.2019 for repair, but did not repair it properly to his satisfaction. OP1 did not resolve the issue. One Mr.Gurupreeth Singh, requested complainant to send the copy of the invoice and warranty to solve the problem. A telephone conversation was also held and informed that they would replace the laptop with a new one. But did not do so and also not cared to repair the same properly. Legal notice was also issued which was replied with untenable reasons. He has suffered considerably due to defective supply of the laptop. Hence the complaint.
3. Upon the service of notice, OP 1 and 2 did not appear before the Commission and hence they were placed exparte. OP1 made an application to set aside the exparte order and the same was allowed and the time given to file the version. Inspite of obtaining sufficient time, OP1 did not file the version.
4. In order to prove the case, complainant filed his affidavit evidence and produced documents. Arguments Heard. The following points arise for our consideration:-
1) Whether the complainant has proved deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties?
2) Whether the complainant is entitled to the relief prayed for in the complaint?
5. Our answers to the above points are:-
POINT NO.1: In the Affirmative
POINT NO.2: Partly in the affirmative.
For the following.
REASONS
6. POINT No.1:-
We have perused the complaint, affidavit evidence and documents filed by the complainant. The documents produced by the complainant especially the invoice issued by OP2 clearly speaks that the complainant has purchased DELL INS 3567(13/4/ITB/2GB/WIN10) Laptop with DELL bag and DELL wireless mouse by paying Rs.40,990/-. The various email correspondences clearly shows that the said laptop was not working properly and it was given to OP2 for repairs several times. Even in one of the document, it is mentioned that after check, replaced the parts, issue fixed EPSA passed, working fine, no internet and not updated. No any damage seen. Again there are series of correspondences and exchange of legal notice, wherein it can be found that the said laptop was not properly repaired and given to the complainant for working on it. It is the duty of the OP to provide a standard, trouble free, properly working laptop to its customers and it is also the duty of the OP to get it repaired in case of warranty, free of cost, and in case out of warrantee, by taking the service charges and charges for the parts properly and get it repaired. Any deviation from the same, amounts to service deficiency. Hence we answer point No.1 in the affirmative.
7. POINT NO.2:
The complainant has sought for replacement of the laptop with a new one. On perusing the documents produced by him, it becomes clear that three to four times the complainant has left the laptop with OP2 for repair and inspite of it he is not satisfied with the service of OP2. When this is taken into consideration, it is clear that OP2 unable to repair it properly and hence complainant could not use the same. We are of the opinion that this is a fit case wherein, replacement of the laptop with a new one is to be ordered. Further, the complainant is made to file this complaint for the deficiency in service in not repairing the said laptop inspite of repeatedly handing over it to OP2. As a result complainant has suffered immensely and was not in a position to use the same for his needful. Hence we are of the opinion that if a sum of Rs.5,000/- is ordered to be paid as damages by OPs to the complainant and further a sum of Rs.5,000/- towards litigation expenses is ordered to the complainant by the OPs would be just proper and reasonable. Hence we answer point No.2 partly in the affirmative and pass the following;
ORDER
- Complaint is allowed in part with cost.
- OPs are directed to replace the laptop already sold to the complainant with a new one of same configuration and model within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order, failing which refund the cost of Rs.40,990/- being the cost of the laptop sold to the complainant by OP2 manufactured by OP1 along with interest at 12% p.a., from the date of complaint i.e., 27.08.2019 till payment of the entire amount.
- OPs are further directed to pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- towards damages and Rs.5,000/- towards litigation expenses to the complainant.
- The OPs are further directed comply the above order within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order and submit the compliance report to this forum within 15 days thereafter.
- Send a copy of this order to both parties free of cost.
Note:You are hereby directed to take back the extra copies of the Complaints/version, documents and records filed by you within one month from the date of receipt of this order.
(Dictated to the Stenographer over the computer, typed by him, corrected and then pronounced by us in the Open Forum on this 25th day of September 2020)
MEMBER PRESIDENT
ANNEXURES
- Witness examined on behalf of the Complainant/s by way of affidavit:
CW-1 | Sri. GLEN WILLAMS - Complainant |
Copies of Documents produced on behalf of Complainant/s:
Ex P1: Copy of the Invoice
Ex P2: Copy of the email correspondences,
Ex. P3: Copy of the legal notice
Ex P4: Postal acknowledgement for having received the legal notice (2 nos.)
Ex P5: Unopened unserved returned postal cover
Es P6: Copy of the reply to the legal notice from OP No.1
Ex P7: Certificate under section 65 B of the Indian Evidence Act.
2. Witness examined on behalf of the Opposite party/s by way of affidavit:
NIL
Copies of Documents produced on behalf of Opposite Party/s
MEMBER PRESIDENT
