Chandigarh

DF-II

CC/999/2016

Sanjeev Kumar - Complainant(s)

Versus

Dell India Pvt. Ltd., - Opp.Party(s)

Yogesh Kumar Goel Adv. & Narinder Kumar Adv.

26 Jul 2017

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II, U.T. CHANDIGARH

======

Consumer Complaint  No	:	999 of 2016
Date  of  Institution	:	06.12.2016
Date   of   Decision	:	26.07.2017

 

 

 

 

Sanjeev Kumar s/o Late Sh.Parma Nand, R/o House No.3397/1, Sector 47-D, Chandigarh.    

             …..Complainant

Versus

1]  Dell India Pvt. Ltd., 12, 12/2A, 13/1A, Divyashree Greens, Challanghatta, Varthaur, Hubli, Bangalore 560071

2]  Dell Authorised Service Center, SCO 99-100, 1^st Floor, Sector 17-D, Chandigarh.

3]  M/s The Computer Warehouse, SCO 2479-80, Ground Floor, Sector 22-C, Chandigarh  

                          ….. Opposite Parties

 

BEFORE:  SH.RAJAN DEWAN                 PRESIDENT

         MRS.PRITI MALHOTRA             MEMBER

                                SH.RAVINDER SINGH              MEMBER 

 

Argued by: Sh.Manish Sharma, Adv. proxy for Sh.Yogesh   

 Kumar Goel, Adv. for the complainant.

 Sh.Salil Sablok, Adv. for the OPs No.1 & 2.

 OP No.3 exparte.

 

 

PER PRITI MALHOTRA, MEMBER

 

 

          Briefly stated, the complainant purchased one laptop of make Dell Inspiron Model 3543 from OP No.3 for Rs.29,000/- vide bill NO.9867, dated 4.7.2016, for his daughter, who is pursuing Engineering in Chandigarh College of Engineering, Landra (Ann.C-1).  It is averred that from the day one, the laptop in question started giving problem with regard to internet connectivity through WiFi and as per asking of OP NO.2 the Window was reloaded, but still the problem persisted.  As such, the laptop was deposited with Opposite Party No.2 on 11.8.2016, who returned it after replacing its Hard Disk with an assurance that now it will not give any problem (Ann.C-2).  However, still the laptop was giving the same problem, therefore, the laptop was left with Opposite Party No.2, who returned it after replacing its Wifi Data Card and assured its smooth working (Ann.C-3).   It is also averred that the complainant again approached Opposite Party NO.2 and requested to replace the Laptop in question with new one invoking the guarantee clause, but the same was denied by OP No.2.  It is submitted that the complainant spent an amount of Rs.29,000/- on the purchase of the laptop in question, but complainant’s daughter was not able to use the same due to manufacturing defect in the Laptop, rather he had to arrange another laptop for project work.  Alleging the above act & conduct of the OPs as gross deficiency in service and unfair trade practice, this complaint has been filed. 

 

2]       The OPs NO.1 & 2 have filed joint reply and while admitting the factual matrix of the case, stated that the complainant approached Opposite Party NO.3 for the first time on 12.8.2016 with laptop reporting wifi & windows issue and on diagnosis, it was found that Hard Drive failure was the issue and the same was replaced under warranty.  It is submitted that the grievance of the complainant was addressed and covered under warranty and was handed over to the complainant on his being satisfied with the same.  It is submitted that the complainant was advised to get Windows operating system installed on his own as the same was not factory installed and was installed by the complainant on his own.  It is also submitted that the replacement is done only in case the machine is not repairable and in the instant case, the laptop was repaired/parts replaced under warranty to the satisfaction of the complainant.  It is stated that there is no manufacturing defect in the laptop in question and nothing is on record to substantiate the same.  It is also stated that infact warranty obligation has been fulfilled as and when required and no issues have been reported since then.  Pleading no deficiency in service and denying rest of the allegations, the OPs NO.1 & 2 have prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

         Opposite Party No.3 did not turn up despite service of notice sent through regd. post on 13.12.2016, hence it was proceeded exparte.

 

3]      Rejoinder has also been filed by the complainant thereby reiterating the assertions as made in the complaint and controverting that of the reply filed by OP No.1 & 2.

 

4]       Parties led evidence in support of their contentions.

 

5]       We have heard the ld.Counsel for the parties and have also perused the entire record.

 

6]        It is a proved fact that the complainant purchased Dell Laptop 3543 from OP No.3 on 4.7.2016 by paying an amount of Rs.29,000/- (Ann.A-1). 

 

7]       The reply of OPs No.1 & 2 reveals that the averments set out by the complainant in his complaint regarding replacement of Hard Drive; was advised to get windows operating system installed and the replacement of WiFi Data Card, are admitted, thus requires no separate evidence to prove the same. 

 

8]       The above admission on the part of the OPs No.1 & 2 infers that Laptop purchased by the complainant developed snags within short span of its purchase. This discloses that the very purpose of the purchase of the Laptop got defeated as it was purchased by the complainant for her daughter pursuing Engineering and needed for the project work. Even after the repairs carried out by the OPs, still the device is not functioning well and in such scenario, the complainant cannot be forced to face constant struggle to get the same rectified time & again.

 

9]       Earlier also, it has been observed by this Forum that the electronic gadgets etc. are purchased in order to save the time and not to spend the precious time again & again on getting the gadgets repaired.  It is the prime duty of the manufacturers as well as the Service Centres to ensure the smooth and trouble free functioning of the gadget giving value for money to the buyer. As the Manufacturer and Service Centre have failed on this account, so it is held that the Opposite Parties are liable to make the refund of the amount spent by the complainant on the purchase of the faulty machine/laptop in question.   

 

10]      In view of the foregoing discussion, we are of the opinion that the complaint deserves to be allowed against all Opposite Parties. Accordingly, the complaint is allowed against all the OPs.  The Opposite Parties are jointly & severally directed as under:-

1. To refund an amount of Rs.29,000/-being the invoice price of the laptop in question, to the complainant,
2. To pay an amount of Rs.8,000/- to the complainant as compensation for causing him mental & physical harassment for deficiency in service;
3. To pay litigation expenses of Rs.7000/-

         This order shall be complied with by the Opposite Parties within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order, failing which the Opposite Parties shall also be liable to pay interest @9% p.a. on the compensation amount from the date of filing of this complaint till realization, apart from complying with the directions as at sub-para (i) & (iii) above.

11]      However, Opposite Parties may collect the Laptop in question from the complainant, against receipt, only after making payment of the complete awarded/decreetal amount to the complainant.

        Certified copy of this order be communicated to the parties, free of charge. After compliance file be consigned to record room.

Announced

26^th July, 2017             

                                                                                      Sd/-

                                                                   (RAJAN DEWAN)

PRESIDENT

 

 

Sd/-

 (PRITI MALHOTRA)

MEMBER

 

Sd/-

(RAVINDER SINGH)

MEMBER