BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KAITHAL.

                                                     Complaint Case No.71 of 2021.

                                                     Date of institution: 18.03.2021.

                                                     Date of decision:08.02.2022.

Mr. Yaman Kumar Saini S/o Sh. Des Raj Saini, R/o House No.473, HUDA, Sector-29, Kaithal, Haryana-136027.

                                                                        …Complainant.

                        Versus

HP INC, 2f, Tower D & E, Building No.2, DLF Cybergreen, DLF Cybercity, Phase-III, Gurugram, Haryana, 122002 through its Manager.

….Respondent.

        Complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

CORAM:     DR. NEELIMA SHANGLA, PRESIDENT.

                SMT. SUMAN RANA, MEMBER.

                SH. RAJBIR SINGH, MEMBER.

Present:     Sh. D.R.Saini, Advocate, for the complainant.   

                Respondent exparte.

ORDER

DR. NEELIMA SHANGLA, PRESIDENT

        Yaman Kumar-Complainant has filed this complaint under Section 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) against the respondent.

                In nutshell, the facts of present case are that the complainant is an Advocate by profession and due to professional needs, he purchased a HP Laptop (15s-gr0007au) through online from the respondent vide invoice bearing Sr.No.-CND02942KD dt. 22.08.2020 for the sum of Rs.33,999/-.  The case of complainant is that within few days of its purchase, the said laptop started working very slow and it was freezing a lot.  The complainant approached the respondent regarding the said problem but despite repair, the said laptop did not work properly and was making a lot of noise alongwith very slow working and freezing.  Then the complainant immediately registered the complaints with the respondent on 10.01.2021 & 11.01.2021 with complaint Nos.5059601298 & 5059646312.  The technician of the respondent visited the house of complainant and after changing a part of the laptop when the complainant asked the technician to solve the problem of very slow and freezing of the laptop, the technician refused to solve it and told that this laptop cannot work with present configuration which was given in the laptop and suggested the complainant to upgrade this laptop.  The complainant requested the respondents several times through e-mails to repair or replace the said laptop with the new one but the respondent did not redress the grievances of complainant.  So, it is a clear cut case of deficiency in service on the part of respondents and prayed for acceptance of complaint.     

2.            Upon notice, the respondent did not appear and opted to proceed against exparte vide order dt. 27.04.2021 of this commission.

3.               Ld. Counsel for the complainant tendered in evidence affidavit of complainant Ex.CW1/A alongwith documents Annexure-A to Annexure-G and thereafter, closed the evidence.    

4.             We have heard the learned counsel for complainant and perused the case file carefully and minutely.

5.             Sh. D.R.Saini, Adv. for the complainant has argued that the complainant had purchased a HP Laptop (15s-gr0007au) through online from the respondent vide invoice bearing Sr.No.-CND02942KD dt. 22.08.2020 for the sum of Rs.33,999/-.  He has further argued that within few days of its purchase, complainant started facing the issue that the said laptop has started working very slow and freezing a lot.  Hence, complainant registered a complaint with the respondent to solve the problem and their team examined the laptop and tried to solve the problem but failed.  He further argued that the laptop was in warranty period as it was purchased on 22.08.2020 and problem crept in the laptop on 10.01.2021 and complaint was sent to the respondent through online.  The mechanic of the respondent came to test the laptop, who gave his report that there was slow performance of the laptop and it was advised to be upgraded by the concerned mechanic of the respondent company.

                The counsel Sh. D.R.Saini for the complainant has stated that the laptop is defective and is not in working condition and it should be replaced with the new one.  Respondents are also proceeded against exparte as they did not appear in the court even one time. 

6.             Thus, as a sequel of above discussion, the present complaint is accepted exparte with cost.  The respondents are directed to replace the laptop of complainant with the new one within two months from today.  The cost is assessed as Rs.11,000/- which will be paid by the respondent to the complainant.  A copy of said order be sent to the parties free of cost.  File be consigned to record-room after due compliance.     

Announced in open court:

Dt.:08.02.2022.    

                                                                (Dr. Neelima Shangla)

                                                                President.

(Rajbir Singh),            (Suman Rana),          

Member.                            Member.

Typed by: Sanjay Kumar, S.G.