BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, LUDHIANA.

                                                          Complaint No:  410 of 07.07.2015.                                                            Date of Decision: 03.03.2017.

Mr. Prabhjot Singh, House No.B/232, St. No.9-L, Isher Nagar, G.N.E. College Backside, Ludhiana, Punjab-141006.                                                                                                                                            ..… Complainant

                                                Versus

1. The Manager Avion Tech, SCO-2427-28, Ist  FLR, Sec-22-C, Tribune Rd. Sector-22, Chandigarh-160022
2. The Manager, Creative Computers, 110-A, Model Gramkochar Market, Ludhiana, Punjab-141001.
3. The Managing Director, Dell International Services India Private Limited, Plot No.123, EPIP Phase II, Whitefield Industrial Area-560066, Bangaluru, Karnataka-560066

Also at:

Dell India Pvt. Ltd., Divyashree Gardens, 12/1, 12/2A, 13/1A,       Chellaghatta Village, Varthur Hobli, South Bangalore-560094.

…..Opposite parties 

                                      Complaint under the Provisions of Consumer Protection Act, 1986

QUORUM:

SH. G.K. DHIR, PRESIDENT

SH. PARAM JIT SINGH BEWLI, MEMBER

COUNSEL FOR THE PARTIES:

For complainant   :         In person.

For OP1               :         Complaint against OP1 stands dismissed as withdrawn                                      vide order dated 30.09.2015.

For OP2               :         Sh. Rahul Rajput, Advocate.

For OP3.              :         Sh. Ritesh Mohindra, Advocate.

ORDER

PER G.K. Dhir, PRESIDENT

1.                Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act (hereinafter referred as Act) filed by complainant by pleading that he purchased one Dell Laptop (Inspiron 15r 5537 i5 Processor, 4^th generation, 4GB Ram, 750 GB Hard Disk, 2 GB graphic card)  from OP No.2 by paying Rs.42,000/- on 08.09.2014 to OP2.  Said laptop soon started emitting problem with starting and restarting and the same gave complainant an electric shock. So this laptop was taken to OP1 for repair, who denied services by claiming that laptop was from Thailand. Complainant took it with OP2, who refused to help in resolving the issue. Though many efforts made by complainant for getting laptop repaired by contacting OP1 and OP2, but of no consequences. Even Ops are not responding to the communication sent by complainant. As per promise given by Ops, complainant is entitled for an undisrupted and honest services. It looks that complainant had been deceived and that is why the dispute not resolved despite sending of letter dated 18.05.2015 to Ops. By pleading deficiency in service and adoption of unfair trade practice by Ops, prayer made for directing Ops to apologize for the inconvenience caused to the complainant and provide a new laptop of same model and even provide efficient services for the laptop at the earliest. Compensation of Rs.10,000/- and litigation expenses of Rs.1,000/- more claimed.

2.                Complaint against OP1 was dismissed as withdrawn on 30.09.2015.

3.                In reply filed by OP2, it is pleaded interalia as if complaint false, vexatious and frivolous; complainant has suppressed the material facts from the Forum; all the allegations made in the complaint are not true and correct. Admittedly, complainant approached OP2 for purchase of Dell Laptop and it was disclosed to complainant that warranty, if any, is to be taken care of by the manufacturer or its authorized service centre. Present complaint alleged to be filed for getting unjust enrichment. There is no deficiency in service on the part of OP2. No loss suffered by complainant and as such, he is not entitled to any relief. At the time of purchase of laptop by complainant from OP2, it was specifically disclosed to him that the laptop is from Thailand and the same was printed on laptop also. Complainant has never approached OP2 till date. Laptop was delivered to the complainant in working condition and if there is any problem in the laptop, then OP2 is not responsible for the same. Besides it is claimed that no cause of action has accrued to complainant and this Forum has no jurisdiction.

4.                In separate written statement filed by OP3, it is claimed that the product purchased by complainant from OP2 was purchased after fully satisfying about the condition of the same. Complainant has suppressed the material facts. It is claimed that OP2 is not authorized to sell the said system in India manufactured by OP3 because the same was not meant for sale in India. Said product was meant for sale only in Thailand because there was no system for service  support in India. That product does not have international warranty. OP2 illegally imported the said system without knowledge of OP3 and sold the same to complainant. OP3 condemns unfair trade practice of OP2. OP3 is a leading manufacturer of laptop, who provides services to the complete satisfaction of the consumers. Complaint is not maintainable because the same has been filed out of greed and nefarious designs of extracting money. No cause of action has accrued against OP3. Complainant has not approached the Forum with clean hands. Each and every other averment of complaint denied. No terms and conditions of the warranty violated by OP3. OP3 not aware of any conversation between OP2 and complainant. OP3 provides the services without delay or negligence as and when called by consumer.

5.                Complainant to prove his case, tendered in evidence his affidavit Ex. CA along with documents Ex. C1 to Ex. C4 and then closed evidence. Even affidavit Ex. CB of Sh. Parshant Adhikari tendered in evidence on behalf of complainant.

6.                On the other hand counsel for OP3 tendered in evidence affidavit Ex. DW3/A of Sh. Nitesh Ranjan, authorized representative of Dell International Services India Pvt. Ltd.  and then closed evidence. Counsel for OP2 tendered in evidence affidavit Ex. DW2 of Sh. Vinod Kumar Angi along with document Ex. R1 and then closed evidence.

7.                Written arguments not submitted by any of the parties. Oral arguments heard and record gone through carefully.

8.                OP2 has admitted in the written statement that the laptop in question purchased by complainant from him and the invoice of purchase in this respect is produced on record as Ex. C3. This laptop was purchased by complainant from OP2 i.e. Creative Computers for Rs.42,000/- on 08.09.2014. Description of the goods laptop Dell given in Ex. C3 as well as in Ex. C4, the receipt of payment. However, representative of OP3, Dell Company claims that the product in question not amenable to sale in India because same manufactured for sale in Thailand only. As per that affidavit Ex. DW3/A, no system for providing services for such product meant for sale in Thailand, available in India and the product does not carry international warranty. So it is obvious that an unfair trade practice adopted by OP2 in sale of the product in question to complainant. However, complainant admits that he is graduate and as such, he must have known after reading the stamp on laptop, as if same is manufactured in Thailand. Realizing this position of unfair trade practice by OP2, counsel for OP2 opted during course of arguments that repair of the laptop will be done by OP2 at earliest. Same is also one of the reliefs claimed through relief clause and as such, OP2 directed to repair the laptop in question at its expenses and without charging anything from complainant within 15 days on production of same by complainant with OP2. However, OP3 itself is cheated due to sale of the laptop in question in India. OP3 can initiate independent action against OP2 under Trade Marks Act etc, if they so desire because of the sale of the product meant for sale in Thailand only and not in India.

9.                Even if the warranty card not produced by complainant, despite that sale of the product in question by OP2 to complainant is admitted. Repair has not been done despite sending letter Ex. C1 dated 29.05.2015 by complainant and even complainant claims that he made repeated visits for getting  the repair done and as such, virtually complainant stood harassed due to action of non repair of laptop by OP2, who is the seller. So complainant entitled for compensation for mental harassment and also to litigation expenses.

10.              As a sequel of above discussion, complaint allowed in terms that OP2 will repair the laptop in question at his expenses within 15 days of production of the same by complainant with it. Compensation for mental harassment of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only) and litigation expenses of Rs.3,000/- (Rupees Three Thousand only) more will be payable by OP2 to complainant within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. However, complaint against OP3 is dismissed. Copies of order be supplied to parties free of costs as per rules. File be indexed and consigned to record room.

                                       (Param Jit Singh Bewli)                    (G.K. Dhir)

                                       Member                                            President

Announced in Open Forum.

Dated:03.03.2017.

Gobind Ram.