Order No.                 .

This is an application u/s.12 of the C.P. Act, 1986.

          The case of the complainant is that he purchased one laptop of Del Company from the OP on payment of Rs.37,715/- on 14^th July, 2012 with a valid warranty card for one year and also received cash memo/invoice for the same.

          The specific case of the complainant is that after the expiry of the one year warranty period, when he went to the DEL Services Centre to extend the warranty on 02-07-2013, the authority of the service centre said that the warranty period of such laptop cannot be extended since it is a Hong Kong made product which has been sold to him.  But the said laptop is salable only to Hong Kong and the said laptop could not be sold in India.  It is alleged by the complainant that since the OP1 has sold this DEL product laptop to him with mala fide intention and, as such, the complainant is not getting any service and also other benefit which were available under the terms and conditions of the warranty card.  The main allegations of the complainant is that he put this grievance against the OP1 who sold the DEL make laptop to him and have done unfair trade practice u/s.2(1)(r) of the C.P. Act, 1986.  It is also stated by the complainant that he has also sent a letter dated 11-07-2013 and complained before the OP1 who sold this Hong Kong made product DEL laptop and for such act of OP1, the complainant has suffered from harassment troubles, physical inconvenience and mental agony arising directly breach of warranty and breach of duty/contract the part of the OP for which the complainant has suffered loss and damages.  Hence, this case.

          Fact remains that summons were sent by registered post with A/D by speed post upon the OPs and same were duly served but refused by the OP2 what is evident from the Postal Department report and, as such, the present com plaint against the OP2 is heard ex parte.

          In its written version the OP1 stated that he is running the business as a retailer of computers, computers accessories and computer peripherals after purchasing the products from the authorized whole sellers of reputed manufacturing companies.  It is also stated by the OP1 that the complainant purchased the Dell Laptop from them after thorough inspection and with satisfaction on receiving valid invoice and warranty card.  Fact remains that after purchasing the Laptop the complainant remained silent with regard to his complaint and had made false averments in order to seek extension of warranty over a product that has been legally imported into this country.  In its contention, the OP1 also stated that the Dell Laptop(Inspiration) which was sold to the complainant by them, was purchased from the whole seller of Dell Laptops, one M/s. Ventron Digital Systems Pvt. Ltd. having its office at 2, Met Calf Lane, 1^st Floor, B/H/12 G.C. Avenue Petrol Pump, Kolkata – 700 072 on 14-07-2012 vide invoice No.E01/SINV/12-13/00870 for the purpose of sale.  But fact remains the complainant failed to get the extension of warranty from the authorized service centre of the manufacturer who has allegedly refused/declined to give extension of warranty of services on the purported plea made by the complainant that the Laptop was for exclusive sale within Hong Kong, and could not be sold in India as averted in Paragraph 6 of the instant complaint.

          The OP1, therefore, states that the instant complaint is filed on flimsy ground with a mala fide intention and are fully baseless and concocted, since the said laptop was sold and handed over to the complainant in a sealed package and all the information regarding its manufacture is described on the packet of the said laptop which was duly received by the complainant on 14-07-2012 vide invoice No.E01/SINV/12-13/00870 after paying required Value Added Tax and other charges, if any, as per Govt. rate.  But the complainant filed this case deliberately on a false pretext as if the product which has been sold to him was a smuggled electronic item and also prohibited for sale within India without annexing the details of the information printed on the package as regards to the import details of the said laptop.  So, the OP1 denies and disputes such allegations that there has been any negligence and deficiency on their part as made out by the complainant.  It is also submitted that since the complaint being false, baseless, misconceived and illegal so the complaint petition should be dismissed with heavy cost.

Decision with Reasons

On meticulous study of the complaint and written version including the warranty period, it is found that warranty period expired on 13-07-2013.  But the present complaint was filed on 23-10-2013.  From the complaint it is found that the complainant actually purchased this Laptop on 14-07-2013.  Thereafter, the complainant went to the DEL Service Centre to extend the warranty period on 02-07-2013, but the authority of the Service Centre refused to extend warranty on the around that the above product is Hong Kong made and, as such, warranty could not be extended by them since the product is only saleable in Hong Kong and not in India.  So, it is alleged by the complainant that since the OP1 has sold this Laptop to him with mala fide intention as the DEL Laptop is Hon Kong made and for this reason he has been deprived of having extension of warranty from the DEL Service Centre.  On these allegations, the complainant prayed for issuance of directions before the Forum against the OP to refund the cost price of Laptop which had allegedly been taken from him by the OP and also to pay litigation cost and compensation etc.

          In fact, OP’s Ld. Lawyer submitted that complainant purchased the Del Laptop on receiving valid invoice and warranty card and complainant never made any allegation about the present version that as because it was Hong Kong made.  Its service warranty cannot be extended in India by the Service Centre of Del, India and when during warranty period the laptop in question worked properly and satisfactorily and there was no defect in the said laptop then after expiry of warranty period complainant cannot claim that as because it is Hong Kong made so the extension of service warranty is not available in India and moreover, the OP purchased it knowing fully well that he purchased a Hong Kong made Del laptop and it was his liability and being satisfied he purchased it for which no way this present OP is liable and further submitted that when original warranty period alreadt expired on 13-07-2013 and if any customer cannot avail of any service from Del India Service Centre for that reason OP cannot be made accused.  On the other hand, complainant purchased it, handled it for one year knowing fully well what was the make of that laptop.  But he did not raise any compliant to the OP and for which after expiry of the warranty period on 13-07-2013 complainant is not entitled to any benefit.  Moreover, there is no allegation against the OP about any defect in using the laptop and there is no allegation against the OP regarding operation of that laptop by him and for which this compliant should be dismissed.

          On proper consideration of the argument as advanced by the Ld. Lawyer of the OP and also the complainant and also from the invoice it is clear that complainant purchased one laptop Del and OP issued tax invoice on 14-07-2012 and no doubt complainant purchased it on payment of Rs.42,801/- only and in that invoice there is no such condition that practical warranty shall be given by the Del India Ltd. Moreover, in that tax invoice there is no whisper about the name of manufacture of the said Del Inspirion then it is clear at the time of selling the same by the present OP, OP did not disclose what is the make of the said Del Laptop and who shall have to give the service during the warranty period and tax invoice simply speaks that as seller or merchant OP did not disclose the name of the producers of the laptop and name of the Service Centre who shall have to give the service of the laptop.  So, from the tax invoice it is clear that there is no such whisper that Del India Ltd. shall have to give service during the warranty period of one year and extension of warranty shall be made by the Del India Ltd.  Considering that fact it is clear that the OP at the time of purchase suppressed vital matter regarding the make of the same and also about the future complication of the purchasing such laptop and regarding its future extension of warranty.  All these matters were suppressed by the seller and at the same time in the invoice it is also absent then it is clear that as a seller the OP adopted an unfair trade practice and sold away a foreign made Del Laptop which cannot be sold by any seller without such license for selling such foreign made articles and if actually complainant would be informed at the time of purchase that he shall not get any service during warranty period of one year and also shall not be able to extend the warranty period in future in India, in that case, this complainant ought to have think for a moment whether he shall have to purchase such laptop or not because it is known to all that a laptop or a computer is purchased by a purchaser with such condition that during warranty period as per warranty he or she shall have to get such service from manufacturer, service centre and after expiry of warranty period he shall have to get such chance to extend warranty period and without extension of warranty period no laptop or computer can be used by any customer.  Fact remains, in case of purchase of any laptop made in India by any customer, the company gives one year warranty in all respect with condition of extending warranty period on payment of further charge and that is one kind of annual maintenance charge and this factor was suppressed by OP, that is no doubt an unfair trade practice because a consumer who is purchasing a laptop must have to know from the seller what is the future of the laptop regarding extension of warranty and service and if any seller says that during warranty period service cannot be given by any service centre and no further extension can be given by any service centre in that case such a customer shall not have to purchase such a laptop or computer manufactured of any foreign land.  In the particular case complainant has been cheated by the seller on the ground.  If complainant would be informed at the time of contact of purchase about such future of such laptop in that case complainant shall have to choose another laptop made in India but that scope was not given.  On the other hand the tax invoice also speaks about adopting unfair trade practice by the OP.  Such sort of sale are generally called fake sales and fake sales are probably the most common of all other frauds and if the present complainant would be presented about the fate of the laptop, in that case the complainant as a consumer may practically think himself before purchasing such type of foreign made article in respect of which in India there is no warranty or there is no extension of warranty or any service.  As per rule of fair trade practice a merchant or a seller must have to inform the purchaser about the nature and character of the particular item and it is mode of operation including service to be given in respect of any defect or in respect of any mal functioning and this information must be supplied by the merchant or fair traders because it is the responsibility of the seller to inform the purchaser and it is the right of the consumer to know whether the article what he wants to purchase will actually give him such service for a longer period or not.  But, in this case, OP has completely suppressed the fact so by that act no doubt OP by adopting fraudulent and deceptive market practice sold the same and for which after one year use in the market that laptop cannot be repaired at any place, particularly Del in India or any other company shall not have to give any service because it is foreign made only it is salable at foreign land and service can only be given within Hong Kong and for such sort of fraud practice adopted by the OP complainants laptop shall have become one casket if any mal functioning is found at any stage.

          So, considering the above facts we have gathered no doubt OP by adopting fraud practice and also by deceptive marketing practice sold the foreign articles without mentioning its warranty and also its make, sold it.  By such an act no doubt OP has defrauded the complainant and no doubt complainant position is very much painful in view of the fact in respect of that laptop he shall not have to get any service from anywhere in India.  So, the entire purpose of purchasing the laptop has become frustrated after warranty period and for which no doubt OP is completely responsible for adopting unfair trade practice and deceptive marketing practices and another factor is that OP as a merchant or seller of the foreign article (laptop in question) has no license to sell it and in respect of laptop or computer it is the duty of the seller to note down in the tax invoice that during warranty period from which service centre of the company he shall have to get services and what are the methods for extension of warranty period by the Service Centre but in all respect of all these chapters in tax invoice are silent and that is silence on the part of the merchant.  So, only for deceiving the customer and the present complainant/consumer, no doubt the complainant has been deceived and fact remains on the date of sale complainant was deceived by the OP but he failed to realize that he had been deceived on that date and the fraud had been practiced on that date of sale but everything is disclosed when complainant went to extend his service warranty that means OP with full knowledge sold such an article knowing fully well that it has no warranty in India and further so for such sort of unfair trade practice the OP should be imposed compensation, penalty etc. and no doubt complainant has proved it for which complaint should be allowed.

          Thus, complaint succeeds.

Hence,

Ordered

That the case be and the same is allowed on contest against the OP with a cost of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten thousand only).

          For adopting unfair trade practice and for causing dam ages to the complainant for not getting any warranty in India since purchase and also for not getting any extension of warranty of said laptop due to its foreign origin OP shall have to pay Rs.25,000/- as compensation to the complainant and also to replace the said laptop by handing over a Del India product laptop to the complainant within 15 days from the date of this order.  If OP fails to handover Del India made laptop in place of Del Hong Kong made in that case OP shall have to pay the value of the said laptop i.e. Rs.41,000/-(Rupees Forty one thousand only).

          OP shall have to comply the order within 15 days from the date of this order failing which for non-compliance of the order OP shall have to pay a penal interest @Rs.300/- per day till full satisfaction of the decree.

          For adopting unfair trade practice and also for adopting fraudulent and deceptive marketing practice OP shall have to pay punitive damages to the extent of Rs.20,000/- to this Forum and this punitive damages imposed to check and control the fraud and deceptive market practice as adopted by the OP.  

          OP is directed to comply this order within 15 days from the date of this order failing which penal action shall be started against him and for that reason also he shall be prosecuted and further fine and penalty may be imposed.