DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BATHINDA (PUNJAB) CC. No. 283 of 06-10-2009 Decided on : 04-02-2010 Nelash Jindal S/o Sh. Tarsem Chand Jindal R/o Shop No. No. 274, Grain Market, Bathinda now R/o Street No. 2, Power House Road # 21030, Bathinda. .... Complainant Versus Dell India Pvt. Ltd., M-4, SIPCOT Industrial Park, Sunguvarchartram Post, Sriperumbudur Taluk, Kancheepuram, District Tamil Nadu through its Director/Managing Director ... Opposite party Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. QUORUM Ms. Vikramjit Kaur Soni, President Dr. Phulinder Preet, Member Sh. Amarjeet Paul, Member For the Complainant : Sh. Naveen Goyal, Counsel the complainant For the Opposite parties : Sh. Harraj Singh, counsel for opposite party. O R D E R VIKRAMJIT KAUR SONI, PRESIDENT 1. In brief, the case of the complainant is that he placed an on line order with the opposite party for purchase of one DELL Laptop worth Rs. 38,000/- by making payment through Demand Draft and the Laptop was delivered to him on 13-10-2008 through courier. It was having one year full guarantee/warranty. Since the date of its purchase, it was giving trouble to him. There was defect in the mother board, which was changed twice by the opposite party, but the problem still exists. opposite party changed heat sink and now there is problem of touch pad. When the laptop is put in use, it results overheat and use to shutdown itself. Thus, there is manufacturing defect in the Laptop. Hence, this complaint for issuing directions to the opposite party to change the Laptop or to refund its price. 2. The opposite party in its written reply submitted that complainant placed an order and Laptop was delivered to him on 13th October, 2008. He called opposite party first time of 20-03-2009 to report regarding defect in Laptop in question that shows that complainant used Laptop without any problem for about 5 months. Heat sink and motherboard were changed on 01-04-2009 & 29-04-2009 respectively. Thereafter motherboard and heat sink were again changed alongwith fan on 13-09-2009. Palm rest was also replaced on 7th November, 2009 even after lapse of period of warranty. It has been pleaded that opposite party has always acted on the requests of the complainant and has solved all problems and replaced all parts of the Laptop which the complainant was not satisfied with. 3. Parties have led evidence besides filing affidavits in support of their respective pleadings. 4. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the record. 5. Admittedly the complainant purchased one Laptop of DELL brand from he opposite party from its on line services. Its delivery has been given to the complainant on 13-10-2008 with one year warranty/guarantee started from 07-10-2008 till 07-10-2009 worth Rs. 38,000/- by making payment through demand draft. The laptop in question has got repaired many times. The mother board and heat sink were changed twice. Touch pad was not working properly and it has overheating problem as well. Opposite party pleaded in its written reply on merits that order was invoiced on 07-10-2008. Thereafter warranty started from 07-10-2008 till 07-10-2009 whereas it should be 13-10-2008 till 13-10-2009 when the Laptop was delivered to the complainant at Bathinda. 6. The perusal of record shows that Laptop in question was repaired on 01-04-2009, 13-06-2009 and 07-11-2009 Ex. R-4 to Ex. R-6 respectively. It was duly received by the complainant after being satisfied by its working and duly signing the job sheet. 7. Here, it is clear that two services were given within warranty period. Therefore, there is no doubt to the fact that Laptop had developed defect within 5 months of its delivery to the complainant inspite of the fact that 3rd service was given after the expiry of warranty. This means that the laptop already had the defect. 8. The support to this fact can be sought by the affidavit of Sh. Balkaran Singh vide Ex. C-2, wherein it has been mentioned that he is a qualified person of the computers, laptops and knows about its utility and problems. His affidavit is reproduced here below : “That the deponent is the qualified person of the Computers, laptops and knows about its utility and problems and I have got sufficient knowledge to trace the defect in the computers and laptops. That on dated 21-09-2009, the deponent inspected said laptop of the complainant, which at that time was within warranty period and I tried to operate the said laptop, but as the said laptop is within the guarantee period/warranty period so I did not break its seal and I tried to operate the said laptop and found that there is manufacturing defect in the same. Its touch paid and charging point are not properly working and it automatically goes shut down.” 9. In view of the findings recorded above, no doubt that there is manufacturing defect in the laptop in question which amounts to gross deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party as the complainant had to get it repaired time and again. If there was no problem/defect in the laptop, there was no need to the complainant to get it repaired again and again. This clearly proves that there is manufacturing defect in the Laptop. 10. Hence, this complaint is partly accepted with no order as to costs. The opposite party is directed to deliver new and fresh Laptop of the same make/brand to the complainant within 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. At the same time, the laptop in question which is in possession of the complainant be handed over back to the opposite party. 11. Copy of this order be sent to the parties concerned free of cost and the file be consigned to the record. Pronounced : 04-02-2010 (Vikramjit Kaur Soni) President (Dr. Phulinder Preet) Member (Amarjeet Paul) *ik Member