DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SAHIBZADA AJIT SINGH NAGAR (MOHALI)

                                  Consumer Complaint No.11 of 2016

                                                Date of institution:  06.01.2016                                         Date of decision   :  26.09.2016

Kuldip Singh Pabla resident of House No.2323, Sector 65, Tehsil and District Mohali.

 ……..Complainant

                                        Versus

HCL Infosystems Ltd., D-233, Sector 63 Noida 201301.

                                                           ………. Opposite Party

Complaint under Sections 12 to 14

of the Consumer Protection Act

Quorum

Shri Ajit Pal Singh Rajput, President                          Mrs. R.K. Aulakh, Member.

Present:    Complainant in person.

                Opposite Party ex-parte.

ORDER

By Ajit Pal Singh Rajput, President

                Complainant, Kuldip Singh Pabla resident of House No.2323, Sector 65, Tehsil and District Mohali, has filed this complaint against the Opposite Party (hereinafter referred to as the OP) under Sections 12 to 14 of the Consumer Protection Act. The brief facts of the complaint are as under:

2.             The complainant ordered a Tablet HCL ME TAB YZ which he received on 03.11.2014 by paying Rs.5,939.00.  However, the tablet did not perform its operation and the complainant talked to the customer service centre of the OP at Chandigarh who informed that the software is malfunctioning and returned it to the complainant after 4-5 weeks by repairing.  However, the tablet did not work properly and then the complainant again took it to the customer service centre which retained it for repairs and returned it to the complainant after 4-5 weeks.  However, it did not perform properly and some more defects appeared in it. In all the tablet was got repaired by the complainant 5 times and it remained with the repair centre for 8-9 months and is still not working. The personal visits as well as repeated e-mails to the OP did not yield any result.    Hence this complaint for giving directions to the OP to refund him the cost of tablet to the tune of Rs.5,939/-; to pay him Rs.10,000/- for harassment, mental tension and Rs.2,000/- towards litigation.

3.             Notice was sent to the OP through e-mail and there was no report of its failed message. None appeared for the OP nor any reply received through e-mail/post. The OP was accordingly proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 11.07.2016.

4.             In order to prove the case, the complainant tendered in evidence his affidavit Ex. CW-1/1; copies of receipt Ex.C-1; reply Ex.C-2; receipts Ex.C-3 and C-4 and e-mails Ex.C-5.

5.             The complainant has argued that he purchased the TAB vide retail invoice dated 24.10.2014 Ex.C-1 for Rs.5,939/-.  However, the TAB did not function properly and the complainant had number of times taken the TAB to the service centre of the OP for repairs where the service centre retained it for several days but could not repair/rectify it properly. The complainant has proved e-mails/job orders Ex.C-2 to C-5 to show that the TAB is not working properly.

6.             We have gone through the pleadings and evidence produced by the complainant. The documents Ex.C-2 to C-5 show that the complainant had on number of occasions took up the matter with the OP for repair of the TAB. Even the OP had in its e-mail admitted that its service centre has received the TAB for repairs depriving its defect free usage by the complainant. The OP did not appear to contest the complaint inspite of sending the message on its e-mail. Non appearance of the OP shows that it has nothing to say with regard to the averments of the complaint.

7.             Accordingly, we direct the OP to refund the amount of Rs.5,939/- (Rs. Five thousand nine hundred thirty nine only) to the complainant. We also find that the complainant is entitled to a lump sum amount of Rs.5,000/- (Rs. Five thousand only) on account of mental agony caused to the complainant due to the negligence of the OP alongwith litigation cost.   The present complaint stands allowed.            

                The OP is further directed to comply with the order of this Forum within 45 days from the date of receipt of this order, otherwise the OP shall be liable to pay 8% interest per annum on the total cost awarded.

                The arguments on the complaint were heard on 20.09.2016 and the order was reserved. Now the order be communicated to the parties. Copy of the order be sent to the parties free of cost and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room.

Pronounced

Dated: 26.09.2016    

                                         (A.P.S.Rajput)           

President

(Mrs. R.K. Aulakh)

Member