Haryana

Ambala

CC/137/2014

RAVI NARAYAN - Complainant(s)

Versus

HCL INFOSYSTEM LTD. - Opp.Party(s)

MURARI LAL MADAN

22 Sep 2015

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, AMBALA.

           Complaint Case No.:   137 of 2014

           Date of Institution    :   23.05.2014           

                                                                                   Date of Decision       :   22.09.2015

Ravi Narayan son of Shri Sushil Kumar Sharma, resident of 1499, C-IV, Near Old Grain Market, Jaroda Gate, Jagadhri.

……….Complainant

Versus

1.       HCL Infosystem Ltd. (Company) D-233, Sector-63, Noida 201301 through its Managing Director.

2.       SSDN Infosolutions, G-7A, Sidhartha Building, 96, Nehru Place, New Delhi 110019, through its proprietor.

3.       Sanghanak Technology, Authorized Service Centre, HCL Infosystems Ltd. 5683, Ist Floor, Nicholson Road, Ambala Cantt 133001, through its Proprietor/Manager.

                                                                                       ……Opposite Parties

Complaint under Section 12 of the  Consumer Protection Act.

CORAM:    SH. A.K. SARDANA, PRESIDENT.

                   SH. PUSHPENDER KUMAR, MEMBER.                  

Present:        Sh. Murari Lal Madan, Adv. counsel for complainant.

                     Sh. S.R. Bansal, Adv. counsel for OP No.1.

         Sh. Keshav Sharma, Adv. counsel for OP 3.

                     OP No.2 given up.

ORDER

                   Complainant has filed the present complaint alleging therein that after passing Master of Computer Application in 2008, he started providing services as Corporate Trainer to IBM Indian Pvt. Ltd. at Gurgaon on contract basis and was also doing Ph.D in artificial intelligence (Computer Science & Engineering) for which  he felt need to purchase a Laptop of high configuration  and thus he approached the OP No.2 who introduced  Laptop Model Z35 C2D and assured about its good quality & performance having warranty for one year and extended warranty upto three years.  As such, the complainant paid a sum of Rs.50,050/-  vide invoice  dated 22.10.2008 for purchase of the said Laptop with extended warranty of 3 years.  After two years of the purchase of  Laptop, it developed problems of heat sink due to which the computer used to shut down every now and then. Besides it, the speakers of the Laptop also became defective.  So, the complainant approached the service centre of OP No.1 and got the Laptop repaired in three months approximately after great efforts.  Before expiry of extended warranty, the complainant obtained AMC (Annual Maintenance Contract) from the OP No.1 for a further period of two more years on payment of Rs.7280/- vide invoice dated 01.11.2011 and as per terms of the said contract, OP No.1 was liable to repair the Laptop free of costs including replacement of parts. On 08.08.2013, the Laptop again developed the same problem of heat sink and speakers, therefore, the complainant made a complaint to OP No.1 telephonically vide Ticket number 8503211414 and OP No.1 suggested the complainant to hand over the Laptop to OP No.3 and thus on 12.08.2013, complainant handed over the same to OP No.3 vide job sheet mentioning the narrated faults. After two days, OP No.3 telephonically informed the complainant that heat sink & the speakers are faulty and he had already raised the orders for the same and will get the parts in 10 days from OP No.1 i.e. from Noida but after a lapse of 10 days, OP No.3 again informed  that the required parts are not available in the office of OP No.1 and it will take some time. However, the parts were not arranged and every time the period for procuring the parts was extended. In this regard, complainant made e-mails dated 16.10.2013 & 31.12.2013 to Nodal Appellate Authority of OP No.3 service centre as well as other officers of the company but of no avail and since then the Laptop is lying with the OP No.3 but the defects have not been rectified by the Ops till date. As such, having no other alternative, present complaint has been filed by the complainant seeking relief as mentioned in the prayer para.

2.                Upon notice, Op No.1 appeared through counsel and filed written statement stating therein that the complaint is not maintainable and there is no deficiency in service on the part of Ops.  It has been further urged that the  complainant has approached this Hon’ble Forum only  against deficiency in service and not against the defective goods, as such, the complainant cannot claim for refund of the purchase price of the Laptop in question as he failed to show or demonstrate that the Laptop in question was having any manufacturing defect and was beyond repairable. As per warranty terms & conditions, complainant is not entitled to seek refund of the price of Laptop rather the OP NO.1 is still ready and willing to perform its part of obligation under the warranty period/AMC Contract.  In the end, prayer for dismissal of complaint with costs has been made.

                   OP No.2 was given up by counsel for complainant being unnecessary party on 12.01.2015 whereas counsel for OP No.3 adopted the written statement filed on behalf of OP No.1 by getting recorded his statement on 01.05.2015.

3.                In evidence, the complainant has tendered his affidavit as Annexure CX alongwith documents as Annexures C-1 to C-16 and closed the evidence whereas on the other hand, counsel for OP No.1 tendered affidavit of Sh. D.K. Singh as Annexure RW/X and closed the evidence and Sh. Rahul  Proprietor of OP No.3 Service Centre tendered a statement that he does not want to lead any evidence and the written statement filed by OP No.1 be read in his evidence.

4.                After hearing Ld. Counsel  of the parties and appreciating the documents placed on file, it is not in dispute that Laptop in question was purchased by the complainant from OP company and  it became defective within its extended warranty period and after repeated visits & requests, the defects of  ‘heat sink and speakers’ etc. developed in the Laptop have not been removed by the Ops. In support of his case, the complainant has placed on record Job Sheet dated 12.08.2013 (Annexure C-1) and e-mails sent to the Ops (Annexure C-9) which reveals that the Laptop became defective and was deposited with the Ops for removing its defects.  But after retaining the same at their Service Centre,  the Ops failed to remove its defects till date which is admittedly a deficiency in service on the part of Ops. On the other hand, the arguments put forth by the Ops are not sufficient to contradict the submissions of the complainant as they have admitted that due to non-availability of the parts, the delay has been caused in repairing the Laptop in question and as per warranty period/AMC contract, they are still ready and willing to perform its part of obligation. Accordingly, we allow the present complaint and direct  the Ops No.1 & 3 to comply with the following directions within thirty days from the communication of this order:-

(i)      To rectify the defects in the Laptop of complainant which is lying at their Service Centre since 12.08.2013 and  hand it over to the complainant in the perfect working condition to his satisfaction and if the same is not possible, then to return the price of Laptop to the extent of Rs.30,030/- i.e. after deducting 40% of the cost of Laptop (Rs.50,050/- cost of Laptop - Rs.20,020/- being 40% of the cost of Laptop) on account of depreciation charges alongwith a sum of Rs.7280/- charged from complainant on account of AMC (Annual Maintenance Contract).

 (ii)    To pay Rs.10,000/- as compensation on account of mental agony & harassment including costs of litigation etc.

 

                   Further the award in question/directions issued above must be complied with by the Ops No.1 & 3 within the stipulated period failing which all the awarded amounts  shall attract simple interest @ 12% per annum for the period of default. So, the complaint is decided in above terms. Copies of this order be sent to the parties concerned, free of costs. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance. 

 Announced:22.09.2015                                                                                           Sd/-

                                                                                                                      (A.K. SARDANA)

                                                                                                                           PRESIDENT

                                                                                                                                   Sd/-

                                                                                                                     (PUSHPENDER KUMAR)

                                                                                                                                   MEMBER