Haryana

Kurukshetra

CC/335/2021

Rajesh Kumar Deswal S/o Jagmal Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Apple Inc - Opp.Party(s)

Asish Deswal

30 Apr 2024

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISISON, KURUKSHETRA

Complaint No. 335 of 2021

Date of institution: 28.10.2021

                                                Date of decision: 30.04.2024

 

Rajesh Kumar Deswal son of Shri Jagmal Singh Deswal, resident of House No. 25, Sector-5, Urban Estate, Kurukshetra Mb. 9355777355.

 

                                                                        …Complainant.

Versus

 

1. Apple Inc., Registered Office (India) at 19th Floor, Concorde Tower C, UB City, No. 24, Vittal Maliya Road, Bangalore-560001, Karnataka through its Managing Director. Email ID: Bangalore admin@apple.com.

 

2. Reliance Retail Limited- Zirakpur, Showroom no.-12, Block-A, LG Floor, Chandigarh City Centre, VIP Road, Zirakpur, SAS Nagar, Punjab-140603,through its Manager. Email ID: kulpreet.singh@ril.com.

 

3. Paytm E-commerce Pvt. Ltd., Headquarter at B-121, Sector-5, Noida, Uttar Pradesh-201301, India through its Managing Director.

 

4. Strides Commerce Pvt. Ltd, 369, Sarathy Arcade, 13th Cross, 30th Main Road, Banashankari, 2nd Stage, Bangalore, Karnataka- 560070,through its Manager. Email ID: sumanth@stridescommerce.

 

…Opposite parties.

 

•  

NEELAM, MEMBER.

RAMESH KUMAR, MEMBER.

 

Present:    Shri Ashish Deswal, Legal Aid counsel for                                                          complainant.

                             Shri Shekhar Kapoor, Advocate for the OP No.1.

                             Shri Ashwani K. Goel, Advocate for the OP No.2.

                             Shri Vineet Bajaj, Advocate for the Op no.3.                

                             OP No.4 ex-parte.

 

 

 

• :     

 

This is a complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act.

2. complainant had purchased for his personal use an "Apple Watch series 6" (hereinafter referred as "the watch") bearing IMEI no. 352968119667832 and Serial no. SGY6DH3J1Q1Y2, from Strides Commerce Pvt. Ltd., the OP No. 4 vide invoice/Bill number 29D0027368401951 dated 12.11.2020 for Rs. 52,900/-. The order was placed through e-commerce website “Paytm.com”, the OP No.3 and Paytm order id is 12176432604. The watch was manufactured by Apple Inc., the OP No.1. The watch came with one year warranty from the manufacturer. It is further averred that he has been using the watch with due care and caution as per the guidelines contained in the user manual. But in August, 2021 some defect had arisen in the speaker of the watch as period. Therefore, on 24.08.2021, he had taken the watch to the authorized service provider of OP No.1 in Zirakpur, namely Reliance Retail Limited-Zirakpur, the OP no.2 and explained the problem to him. The OP No.2, after inspecting the watch, found that the speaker was not working properly as mentioned in the job card/service record and kept the watch with him at the service centre for repair.
3.  
4.  

         

5.             On notice, OP No. 2 appeared and filed their written version raising preliminary objections with regard to maintainability; cause of action; locus standi; jurisdiction and concealment of true and material facts. On merits, it is submitted that the averments made therein are denied as while returning the product to him, he was also given the Job Sheet provided by the OP No.1 mentioning the reason of the said defect as “Foreign material observed in Speaker Mesh” which was not covered under the under Apple Limited warranty and the OP no.1 offered to replace the product with charges but he refused to accept the said offer of the Op no.1.

6.             On notice, opposite party No. 3 appeared and filed their written version raising preliminary objections with regard to maintainability; cause of action; locus standi; jurisdiction and concealment of true and material facts. On merits, complaint was contested and vehemently denied the allegations of the complaint as made out in the complaint and prayed for dismissal of the complaint. 

7.             On notice, OP No. 4 did not appear despite service and opted to be proceeded against ex-parte, vide order dated 09.06.2022 of the Commission.

8.             Learned counsel for the complainant has tendered into evidence affidavit Ex. CW1/A and documents EX. C1 to Ex. C11 and closed the evidence on 30.08.2022 by suffering separate statement.

9.            Learned counsel for the OP No. 1 has tendered into evidence affidavit Ex. RW1/A and document Ex. R1 closed the evidence on 03.01.2023 by suffering separate statement.

10.            Learned counsel for the OP No.2 has tendered into evidence documents Ex. R2 to Ex. R4 and closed the evidence on 03.01.2023 by suffering separate statement.

11.            Learned counsel for the OP No.3 has tendered into evidence affidavit Ex. RW3/A and documents Ex. R5 and Ex. R10 and closed the evidence on 29.03.2023 by suffering separate statement.

12.            We have heard the learned counsel for the parties at length and have gone through the record available on the file carefully.

13. complainant had purchased for his personal use an "Apple Watch series 6" (hereinafter referred as "the watch") bearing IMEI no. 352968119667832 and Serial no. SGY6DH3J1Q1Y2, from Strides Commerce Pvt. Ltd., the OP No. 4 vide invoice/Bill number 29D0027368401951 dated 12.11.2020 for Rs. 52,900/-. It is further argued by the counsel for the complainant that the order had been placed through e-commerce website “Paytm.com”, the OP No.3 and Paytm order id is 12176432604. The watch was manufactured by Apple Inc., the OP No.1. The counsel of the complainant further argued that the watch came with one year warranty from the manufacturer. It is further averred that he has been using the watch with due care and caution as per the guidelines contained in the user manual. But in August, 2021 some defect had arisen in the speaker of the watch as period. Therefore, on 24.08.2021, he had taken the watch to the authorized service provider of OP No.1 in Zirakpur, namely Reliance Retail Limited-Zirakpur, the OP no.2 and explained the problem to him. The OP No.2, after inspecting the watch, found that the speaker was not working properly as mentioned in the job card/service record and kept the watch with him at the service centre for repair.  It is further argued that on 03.09.2021 i.e. after about 10 days, the OP No. 2 had returned the watch without any repair and when he inquired regarding the same, he did not give any reason for not repairing the watch. He requested to OP No.2 to repair the watch as per warranty policy or provide a way out to get the same repaired but he refused to do so.  
14.  

15.             Thus, as a sequel to above said discussion, the OP No.1 is directed to replace the aforesaid watch with a new one within one month from today. The complainant is directed to hand over the defective watch to the service centre of Reliance Retail Ltd. i.e. the OP No.2withi 10 days from today.  The complaint is accepted, which is assessed of Rs.11,000/. 

16.            In default of compliance of this order, proceedings shall be initiated under Section 72 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019, as non-compliance of court order shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than one month, but which may extend to three years, or with fine, which shall not be less than twenty five thousand rupees, but which may extend to one lakh rupees, or with both. A copy of this order be sent to the parties free of cost. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.    

Announced in open Commission:

Dated:30.04.2024

                                                                           (Dr. Neelima Shangla)            

                                                                President,

                                                                DCDRC, Kurukshetra.

(Neelam)                (Ramesh Kumar)

Member                   Member