SMT.MOLYKUTTY MATHEW : MEMBER

     This is a  complaint filed by the complainant  U/S 35 of the Consumer Protection Act 2019 for an order directing the OP to refund the value of lap top for Rs.34637/- along with  compensation of Rs.10,000/- to the complainant for the  deficiency in service and unfair trade practice of OP.

  The brief of the complaint :

     The complainant had purchased one Avita liber core i5 10^th Gen NS14A8INF541-CS laptop serial number of Laptop 7ANA47L897 of the  OP’s company ordered on 25/10/2020 and tax invoice dtd.27/10/2020, the complainant paid Rs.34,637/- to OP.  Thereafter  within the warranty period itself the laptop have somany problems.  The laptop turns off often immediately when it is not plugged to power even after charging for 5-6 hours thereafter the complainant have reported the matter to OP on 14/3/2022.  But the OP not repaired the laptop and closed the complaint on  30/3/2022.  Thereafter the complainant approached OP for several times for repair the laptop.  But the OP not ready to repair or replace the laptop.  Then the complainant send a lawyer notice to OP stating that the OP is to replace a new laptop or to refund the paid amount Rs.34,637/- to the complainant along with  compensation and cost.  But after receiving the notice OP send a whats app message to  complainant that the battery would be replaced on  chargeable basis.  The  warranty on the battery and AC adaptor is  18 months only.  So the OP is not ready to cure the defect of the laptop.  The act of the OP’s the complainant caused much mental agony and financial loss. So there is deficiency of service and unfair trade practice on the part of OP.  Hence the complaint.

           After filing this complaint, notice  issued to OP . The OP received the notice and not appeared before the commission and not filed the version also.   The commission had to  hold that the OP not  appeared before the commission and  no version filed.  As such this case came to be proceed against the  OP  as set  exparte.

    Even though the opposite party remained ex-parte, it is for the complainant to establish the allegations made by him against the OP.  Hence the complainant was called upon to produce evidence in the form of affidavit and documents.   Accordingly the complainant has chosen to produce his affidavit along with 16 documents  marking them as  Exts.A1 to A16 .  The complainant  was examined as PW1.   So the opposite party remain absent in this case.  At the end the Commission heard the case on merit.

    Let us have a clear glance at the relevant documents of the complainant.  Ext.A1 is the tax invoice dtd.27/10/2020. Ext.A2 is the lawyer notice issued by the complainant. According to the complainant, the OP received an amount of Rs.34,637/- from the  complainant  dtd.27/10/2020 and the  laptop ordered on 25/10/2020.  At the time of offering to sell the laptop the OP promised that he will provide prompt service and ready to cure the defect also.  But on 22/3/2022 as per Ext.A3 the complainant filed a complaint to OP regarding the laptop turns off often immediately when it is not plugged to power even after charging  for 5-6 hours.  In Ext.A4, on 30/3/2022 the OP closed  the complaint  without cure the defect of the said laptop.  Again the complainant informed the matter to OP for curing the defect of the laptop.  But OP send  e-mails in Ext.A5 to A16 clearly stated that the warranty on the battery and  AC adaptor is 18 months only.  Then OP stated that the battery would be replaced on chargeable basis.  But complainant states that on 22/3/2022 itself filed the complaint before the OP.  The OP has no steps to cure the defect of the laptop.  Moreover after  receiving  notice the OP not appeared before the commission and proved his case also.  So the OP bound to repair the laptop with free of cost without delay. There is deficiency of service and unfair trade practice on the part of  opposite party.  Under this circumstances we are of the considered view that the OP is directly bound to redressal  the grievance caused to the complainant. So the complainant is  entitled to get the value of laptop for Rs.34637/- from the OP along with Rs.5,000/- as compensation for mental agony and litigation cost to the complainant.

            In the result, the complaint is allowed in part directing  the opposite party to refund the value of laptop  Rs.34637/- to the complainant along with Rs.5,000/- as compensation for mental agony and litigation cost within 30 days of receipt of this order.  In default, the amount of Rs.34,637/- carries interest@ 9% per annum  from the date of order till realization , failing which the   complainant is  at liberty to  execute  the  order as  per the  provisions  of Consumer Protection Act 2019. After the said proceedings the opposite party is at liberty to  take back the laptop from the custody of the complainant.

Exts:

A1- Tax invoice

A2-Copy of lawyer notice

A3 to A16- copy of e mails.

PW1-Abhijith Chandran- Complainant

Sd/                                                 Sd/                                                           Sd/

PRESIDENT                              MEMBER                                           MEMBER

Ravi Susha                             Molykutty Mathew                                 Sajeesh K.P

eva                                                             

                                                                         /forwarded by Order/

                                                                       ASSISTANT REGISTRAR