Present: 1. Sri.P.K.Sasi, President.
2. Smt. Sheena.V.V, Member.
3. Sri.M.P.Chandrakumar, Member
21st day of May 2016
C.C.392/12 filed on 08/08/12
Complainant : Vibheesh .K. , Kunnath House, P.O.Pullur,
Irinjalakuda, Thrissur
(By Sri.M.K.Ranjithkumar, Advocate, Thrissur-3)
Opposite Parties: 1. C Net Computer, J.S.Centre, Opp.Kollattil Temple,
Chalakudy Road, Irinjalakuda.
(By Sri.Joshy Antony, Advocate, Thrissur-3 )
2. M/s.Toshiba India Pvt.Ltd, IIIrd Floor, Building
No.10, Gargaon 122002, Hariyana.
(By Sri.Sujesh K., Advocate, Thrissur-3 )
O R D E R
By Sri.M.P.Chandrakumar, Member :
The case of the complainant is that he had purchased a laptop from the 1st opposite party, on 1-10-11, for the purpose of his wife, being an LIC agent and installed an LIC PROGRAMME SOFTWARE, costing nearly Rs.12,000/-. The complainant is assisting his wife in the LIC works, since the income as an LIC agent is the only source of livelihood for the family. Shortly after the purchase of the Laptop, it developed a booting complaint, which was cleared by the opposite party & entrusted back, to the complainant after one week, stating that there will be no further problem with the laptop. However, during the month of 2/12, there was a problem with the display and also the laptop going off, frequently. This problem was cleared, replacing the base cover assembly and the LED panel. The laptop was handed back, after this process, on 17-04 -12. Again, there was booting problem, which was solved by erasing the software already installed. As a result, all information’s and datas collected, till that time, were ruined. On 19-05-12, the Laptop got stuck and when taken to the opposite parties, they changed the entire hardware system, stating that there was hardware complaint. Due to this changing, the complete programme and data relating to LIC software, which was installed the 2nd time after 17-4-12 was erased. Due to this the complainant and his wife suffered heavily, there was loss of business, mental agony and strain due to the absence of information and datas. The complainant and his wife had to approach several persons for recollecting the datas and information, for which the complainant had incurred additional expenses. The complainant had sent a notice on 21-05-12, stating all these facts and requested for replacement of the Laptop with a new one or refund the purchase cost, within 15 days. But the opposite parties didn’t turn up so far, which is deficiency of service. Hence the complaint filed for orders, directing the opposite parties to return the cost of the Laptop, valuing Rs. 20,800 /- in addition to compensation and cost.
2. In the version filed, the 1st opposite party informs that they have reported the complaints in due time to the 2nd opposite party and informed the matter to the complainant, in time. They have solved the problems of the laptop through the 2nd opposite party and thus made every effort to solve the problems caused to the laptop, by its best ability by services, even free of cost. Thus, there is no deficiency of service on their part, as alleged by the complainant.
3. In the version filed, the 2nd opposite party informs that they offer one year warranty on Laptop. 2nd opposite party is obliged to repair or replace the replaceable unit with a new one, in the occurrence of any failures or defects, covered under the warranty, during the warranty period and second opposite party has duly discharged the responsibility. The complaints of the complainant were duly and promptly attended every time the complainant approached with complaints. In terms of warranty, 2nd opposite party is liable, only to repair the Laptop and not to replace the same, unless the same suffers from manufacturing defect. However, this is not the case of the complainant as per the record maintained,
1] The 1st complaint received was on 31-10-11, with respect to the booting problem. 1st opposite party examined the Laptop, refixed the components. Thereby cleared the complaint and returned the Laptop to the complainant.
2] The 2nd complaint received was on 27-03-12, with respect to the split display and laptop not powering on. 1st opposite party, after examining the laptop, replaced the base cover assembly with a new one, and thus closed the complaint on 12-04-2012 .
3] The 3rd complaint was with respect to the hanging problem, reported on 22-05-12. This complaint was cleared by replacing the hard disc drive. The complaint was thus closed on 31-05-12.
4] The 4th complaint was on 22-09-12, being the key board problem. This problem was solved by replacing the keyboard, on 22-09-12 itself.
5] Another complaint received was the booting problem, on 31-10-12. Accordingly, the components were reaffixed, and the problem solved.
4. According to the opposite party, after the above replacements, the laptop is functioning perfectly and no complaint has been received, till date. No complaints, as alleged, were received during the month of 2/12, on 17-04-12, or on 19-05-12, from the complainant, with reference to the laptop. Considering the above, the complaint be dismissed with costs.
5. The points for consideration are;
1] Is there any deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties?
2] if so, compensation and costs.
6. Evidence consists of exhibits P1 TO P5 & R1 to R3. Both of them have filed proof affidavits. The documents produced as exhibits P1 to P5 are as follows: Ext. P1 is the purchase invoice dated 1-10-11 of the laptop, issued by the 1st opposite party; Ext. P2 is the software installation bill; Ext. P3 is the copy of the notice dated 21-05-12, issued by the complainant to the 1st opposite party ; Ext. P4 is the copy of the notice, forwarded to the 1st opposite party, through E mail dated 6-6-12; Ext. P5 is the copy of the laptop acceptance report dated 27-03-12 of compumobiles, the authorised service centre of Toshiba.
7. The documents produced as evidences by the opposite parties - Exts. R1 to R3 includes the authorisations produced as R1 & R2 and Ext. R3 being the copy of the warranty card.
8. The Forum has studied the case in detail and has the following observations:
1] It is a fact that, as explained in the complaint, the Laptop showed certain complaints for several months, during the 1st year, after its purchase. But it is seen that the opposite party has cleared all the complaints, even by replacing certain parts.
2] The complainant has no complaint that the complaints have not been rectified.
3].As per the proof affidavit filed on 01-07-15 & the argument notes filed on 16-02-16, there is no mention of any complaints, at present, to the computer. This goes on to prove that, after the last repair on 22-09-12, the Laptop is functioning satisfactorily for nearly the last four years. Hence the Forum considers that there is no need to direct the opposite parties to replace the Laptop or refund its cost.
4].The complainant has explained his sufferings in work, due to the frequent complaints to the Laptop for an year. These frequent complaints have also been admitted by the opposite parties in the version, in the argument notes and affidavit filed .
5] Ext. P2 goes on to prove that the complainant has spent Rs.10490/- to install LIC software. However the date on which the software has been installed, has not been shown in the document.
6] The complainant has claimed rupees one lakhs as damages, due to loss of business. However, the details of loss has not been proved by the complainant.
7] In the argument notes filed on 16-02-16, the complainants have alleged manufacturing defects to the Laptop, stating that manufacturing defect has been admitted by the opposite parties. However, no proof of manufacturing defect has been produced before the Forum.
9. In the result the complaint is partially allowed. Considering the fact that there were frequent problems with the Laptop during the 1st year after purchase, which, is sure to have affected the purpose of its purchase, causing mental agony, opposite party is directed to pay Rs.10,000/- as compensation and cost to the complainant within one month from receiving copy of this order.
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected
by me and pronounced in the open Forum this the 21st day of May 2016.
(Sd) (Sd) (Sd)
M.P.Chandrakumar Sheena.V.V. P.K.Sasi, Member Member President Appendix
Complainant’s Exhibits
Ext.P1 purchase invoice dated1-10-11.
Ext.P2 the software installation bill.
Ext.P3 the copy of the notice.
Ext.P4 the copy of the notice forwarded to the 1stopposite party
Ext.P5 the copy of the laptop acceptance report
Opposite party’s Exhibits
Ext.R1&R2 - authorizations
Ext.R3- copy of warranty card
(Id)
Member
