BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, AMRITSAR.

Consumer Complaint No. 529 of 2014

Date of Institution: 30.09.2014

Date of Decision: 24.11.2015 

Rajinder Singh son of Sarabjeet Singh, resident of House No.100, Nagar Nigam Colony, I/s, Gilwali Gate, Amritsar-143001 Punjab.

Complainant

Versus

1. Dealer: IT WORLD through its proprietor/ Manager/ Authorized Signatory Shop No. GF-44, Nehru Shopping Complex, Lawrence Road, Amritsar-143001 Punjab.
2. Manufacturer/Main Dealer: M/s.https://www.toshiba-india.com c/o Toshiba India Pvt. Ltd. Through its Manager/ Managing Director DLF Cyber City, Building No.10, Tower B, 3^rd Floor, Gurgaon-122002 Haryana, India.
3. ASP Service Centre: in Tarvo Technologies Limited, through its proprietor/ Manager/ Authorized Signatory SCO-2473-74, 2^nd Floor, Sector 22-C, Chandgiarh-160022 Phone No.81.999996.
4. ASP Service Centre: in Tarvo Technologies Limited C/O. Advantek Computers, through its Proprietor/ Manager/ Authorized Signatory No.8, Ist Floor, Queens Complex Near Sant Footwear, Queens Road, Amritsar-143001 Punjab Phone No.98140-70808.
5. ASP Service Centre: Ensure Support Service (India) Limited, through its Proprietor/ Manager/ Authorized Signatory, shop No.4,5,6 & 21, 10 Ground Floor, Complex, Tilak Road, Dehrudun-248001, Phone No.+91 1382727797, 2724045.    

Opposite Parties

Complaint under section 11 and 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 as amended upto date.

Present: For the Complainant: Sh. Sanjit Singh, Advocate

              For the Opposite Party No.1: Sh.Chetan Majithia, Advocate

              For the Opposite Party No. 2 : Ajay Mehta, Advocate.

              For the Opposite Parties No.3, 4, 5: Exparte. 

Quorum:

Sh.Bhupinder Singh, President

Mr.Anoop Sharma, Member     

Order dictated by:

Sh.Bhupinder Singh, President.

1. Present complaint has been filed by Sh.Rajinder Singh  under the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act alleging therein that he had purchased a Laptop Toshiba Company, Model SETELLITE C850 Model Number PSCBNG-003002, Serial No.YC 020337Q, Registration No.R20130801, manufactured by Opposite Party No. 2, from Opposite Party No.1 vide bill No.R-0368 dated 23/24-7-2013 for a sum of Rs.39,500/-. Complainant alleges that said Laptop was having three years warranty started from the date of purchase i.e 23.7.2013 to 23.7.2016. Since the date of its purchase, the said Laptop has a manufacturing or inherent problem and the complainant  has been facing the problems i.e.
   1. Key board does not respond to double click or right click.
   2. Shut down on its own and it restarts.
   3. Screen of the Laptop becomes automatically blank and not readable.
   4. Display becomes flickering and the system hangs.
   5. Laptop not charging due to internal connector faulty.
   6. Touch pad problem and downloading and touch pad driver.
   7. Hard disc problem.
   8. Laptop not working properly due to mother board faulty.
   9. Motherboard and touch pad
   10. Again motherboard and DVD writer.
   11. System shut down problem,
   12. Graphic problem
   13. Booting problems
   14. Window pirated

From the above scenario, the Opposite Parties cheated the complainant, even though the said Laptop in question is under warranty and not of use, for which, the complainant  had purchased, so the complainant  faces a lot of problems with the attitude and deficiency of service on the part of the Opposite Parties. The complainant  made so many requests and visits to the Opposite Parties, however, the complaints were attended to by the ASP engineers without issuing any job sheets to the complainant.  Firstly on 7^th of August, 2013 the Laptop in question became out of order. Immediately after the purchase of almost fifteen days, the Laptop started creating problems and started showing technical fault as the said Laptop while in function started hanging up and after few days, the screen of the said Laptop started blinking and thereafter, the screen of the said Laptop became totally blank. The complainant approached Opposite Party No.4 who kept the said Laptop without issuing any job sheet and returned the same to the complainant after solving the said problems. After resolved the said problems, on 13.8.2013 the said Laptop again created another problem with touch pad issue and then the complainant  approached Opposite Party No.3 and deposited the Laptop with them vide job sheet dated 13.8.2013, but after solving first problem the complainant started using the same, hardly after two months, again said Laptop created touch pad, key board/ mouse problem, the complainant  again approached Opposite Party No.3 service centre, who kept the said Laptop with him and thereafter, handed over the same after ten days with assurance that now the Laptop was OK and in future, no problem will be created. But thereafter, on 26^th June, 2014 and then on 24^th July, 2014 then on 18^th August, 2014 and then on 8^th September, 2014, the laptop was handed over to the service centers of the Opposite Parties, but till date the problem is not yet resolved.  The complainant  also made so many telephonic calls to the service centre of the Opposite Parties, but the Opposite Parties  did not pay any heed to the request of the complainant.   Alleging the same to be deficiency in service, complaint was filed seeking directions to the opposite parties to refund the amount of Rs.39,500/- i.e the costs of the said Laptop alongwith interest @ 18% per annum. Compensation and litigation expenses were also demanded.

2. On notice, Opposite Party No.1 appeared and filed written version in which it was submitted that the  manufacturer of the said Laptop i.e. Opposite Party No. 2  is responsible for the quality of the product, after sale services and warranty and therefore, the present complaint is liable to be dismissed qua the answering Opposite Party. Opposite Party No.1 is only the dealer and it is settled law that no liability can be fastened upon the dealer for alleged manufacturing defect or deficiency of service on the part of manufacturer/ Principal.  So, the answering Opposite Party has been impleaded unnecessarily and even no cause of action has ever arisen in favour of the complainant to file the present complaint against  the Opposite Party No.1. While denying and controverting other allegations, dismissal of complaint was prayed.
3. Opposite Party No. 2  appeared and filed its separate written reply in which it was submitted that said Laptop was perfectly working at the time of delivery and the complainant  after being satisfied with the working of the Laptop had taken the delivery. The answering Opposite Party provides a warranty of 3 years for Laptop from the date of original purchase only and the answering Opposite Party is obliged to repair or replace the Field Replaceable Unit (FRU) with a new or qualified used FRI, in the occurrence of any failures or defects covered under the warranty during the period of the warranty and the answering Opposite Party duly discharged its responsibility in this regard.  The warranty on Laptop as provided by the Opposite Party No. 2 expressly excludes any liability for any kind of software programs, pre-installed softwares, application softwares.  It is submitted that as per the records as and when the Laptop in question was handed over by the complainant to the service centre of Opposite Party No. 2, it was returned to the complainant after full satisfaction. Lastly, on 7.9.2014, the complainant lodged complaint  with Opposite Party No.5 with regard to slow function i.e. of Laptop. On inspection, it was found that the problem was arising out of errors in operating system, a third party proprietary software, and for which the Opposite Party does not provide any warranty. The service centre, therefore, again installed the operating system and after finding no problem made it ready for delivery on 20.9.2014. However, the complainant  refused to accept the delivery and started making illegal demands for replacement of Laptop with a new one. The Opposite Party No.5- service centre of Opposite Party No. 2, therefore, sent a letter dated 29.10.2014 to the complainant  requesting him to collect the Laptop in question and the Laptop of the complainant,  is lying at the authorized service centre of the answering Opposite Party in fully working condition. While denying and controverting other allegations, dismissal of complaint was prayed.
4. None appeared on behalf of Opposite Parties  No.3, 4 and 5, so, Opposite Parties  No.3, 4 and 5 were proceeded against exparte vide order of this Forum.
5.  Complainant tendered into evidence his affidavit Ex.C1 alongwith documents Ex.C2 to Ex.C9 and closed the evidence on behalf of the complainant.
6. Opposite Party No.1 tendered into evidence affidavit of Sh.Munish Sachdeva, partner Ex.OP1/1 and closed evidence on behalf of the Opposite Party No.1. Similarly, Opposite Party No. 2  tendered into evidence the affidavit of Sh.Nilesh Sahrma Ex.OP2/1 alongwith documents Ex.OP2/2 to Ex.OP2/5 and closed the evidence on behalf of Opposite Party No. 2 .
7. We have carefully gone through the pleadings of the parties; arguments advanced by the ld.counsel for the parties and have appreciated the evidence produced on record by both the parties with the valuable assistance of the ld.counsel for both the parties.
8. From the record i.e. pleadings of the parties and the evidence produced on record by the parties, it is clear that the complainant purchased a Laptop Toshiba Company, Model SETELLITE C850 Model Number PSCBNG-003002, Serial No.YC 020337Q, Registration No.R20130801, manufactured by Opposite Party No. 2 from Opposite Party No.1 vide bill No.R-0368 dated 24-7-2013 (Ex.C2)  for a sum of Rs.39,500/- with three years warranty started from i.e 23.7.2013 to 23.7.2016. Said Laptop did not work properly from the date of its purchase and gave problems i.e. Key board does not respond to double click or right click, Shut down on its own and it restarts, Screen of the Laptop become automatically blank and not readable,  Display becomes flickering and the system hangs, Laptop not charging due to internal connector faulty, Touch pad problem and downloading and touch pad driver, Hard disc problem, Laptop not working properly due to mother board faulty,  Motherboard and touch pad, Again motherboard and DVD writer, System shut down, Graphic, Booting problems and Window pirated. Said complaints were mostly attended by the ASP engineer of the Opposite Parties  without issuing any job sheets. The complainant  submitted the date wise defects occurred in the laptop of the complainant  on 7.8.2013. Laptop started hanging up and its screen started blinking and ultimately became totally blank. The complainant  approached Opposite Party No.4 who kept the said Laptop  and returned the same after solving the problems. On 13.8.2013, said Laptop started creating another problem of touch pad issue, when the complainant was at Chandigarh. Then the complainant  approached Opposite Party No.3 authorized service centre of Opposite Party No. 2  at Chandigarh vide job sheet dated 13.8.2013 Ex.C4 who returned the Laptop to the complainant  after removing the said problems. On 17.10.2013 again Laptop created touch pad, key board/ mouse problem. The complainant  again approached Opposite Party No.3 vide job sheet dated 17.10.2013 Ex.C5 who returned the said Laptop to the complainant  after removing the problems. On 26.6.2014 the complainant  was at Dehrudun and said Laptop created booting and graphic card problem. Then the complainant  approached Opposite Party No.5 authorized service centre of Opposite Party No. 2, who rectified the problem in the Laptop of the complainant, but he did not issue any job sheet. On 24.7.2014 said Laptop gave problem with booting, graphic card issue while connected with the adopter and the complainant  approached Opposite Party No.5 vide job sheet Ex.C6, who rectified the problem and returned the Laptop to the complainant . On 18.8.2014, said Laptop gave problem of system board lockups/ freeze, ODD-Locks-up problem and the complainant  handed over the Laptop to Opposite Party No.5 vide job sheet Ex.C7 who rectified the problem and handed over the same to the complainant . On 8.9.2014, said Laptop gave problem of shut down, graphic card slow and pirated window problem. The complainant  again handed over the Laptop to Opposite Party No.5 vide job sheet Ex.C8, who again rectified the problem and handed over the Laptop to the complainant. Thereafter, the complainant  made so many requests to the Opposite Parties  through e-mails Ex.C9 for replacement of the Laptop in question, but Opposite Party No.5 did not make any satisfactory reply nor replaced the Laptop nor refunded the amount of the Laptop to the complainant. Ld.counsel for the  complainant  submitted that all this amounts to deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party.
9. Whereas the case of the Opposite Party No.1 is that the Opposite Party No.1 has only sold the Laptop to the complainant  as dealer. No liability can be fastened upon the dealer for any manufacturing defect or deficiency of service on the part of manufacturer or the authorized service centre. So, the present complaint is not maintainable against Opposite Party No.1.
10. Whereas the case of Opposite Party No. 2  is that Laptop was perfectly working at the time of delivery to the complainant . The complainant  after being satisfied with the working of the Laptop took the delivery. Opposite Parties  No.2 to 5 are obliged to repair  or replace the Field Replaceable Unit (FRU) with a new or qualified used FRI, in the occurrence of any failures or defects covered under the warranty during the period of the warranty and the answering Opposite Party duly discharged its responsibility in this regard.  The complainant  could not point out any inherent/ manufacturing defect in the product which is not repairable. Whenever the complainant  approached the Opposite Party authorized service centre, the problems in the Laptop of the complainant  were resolved upto the satisfaction of the complainant as is event from the job sheets provided by the complainant  himself. Opposite Party is liable to repair and is still ready to repair the Laptop of the complainant  during the warranty period, but they are not liable to replace the product until same suffers from manufacturing defect, which is not the case with the Laptop of the complainant. Seven complaints mentioned by the complainant  in the complaint were fully attended to, out of which, 4 complaints were due to software issue which are not covered under the warranty. Only two complaints of the complainant  were genuine and were fully attended/ promptly handled. One time, there was no problem in the laptop of the complainant. The complainant  issued e-mails which were duly replied to the satisfaction of the complainant. The Laptop in question has been lying with Opposite Party No.5 fully repaired since 20.9.2014. Opposite Party No.5 told the complainant  so many times on telephone to get the Laptop which has been fully repaired, but the complainant  did not turn up. Opposite Party No.5 also issued letter dated 29.10.2014 Ex.OP2/5 that there was only operating system issue/ problem in the Laptop of the complainant  which was resolved by the service engineer of the Opposite Party No. 2 and the Laptop of the complainant  has been in good working condition since 12.9.2014. After that the complainant  was informed through mobile phone No. 97815-23034 and through e-mails, but no body came to collect the Laptop in question. The complainant  was therefore, requested to collect the Laptop as soon as possible, but even then the complainant  did not turn up to collect the Laptop in question. Ld.counsel for the opposite party No.2 submitted that there was no deficiency of service on the part of the Opposite Party No.2.
11. From the entire above discussion, we have come to the conclusion that the complainant purchased a Laptop of Toshiba Company, Model SETELLITE C850 Model Number PSCBNG-003002, Serial No.YC 020337Q, Registration No.R20130801, manufactured by Opposite Party No. 2, from Opposite Party No.1 vide bill No.R-0368 dated 24-7-2013 (Ex.C2)  for a sum of Rs.39,500/- with three years warranty starting from i.e 23.7.2013 to 23.7.2016. Said Laptop had some problems and the complainant  approached the Opposite Parties authorized service centre at Amritsar on 7.8.2013, at Chandigarh on 13.8.2013 and 17.10.2013 and thereafter at Dehrudun on 26.6.2014, 24.7.2014, 18.8.2014 and 8.9.2014 and whenever the complainant  approached the authorized service centre of Opposite Party No. 2 , the Laptop of the complainant  was fully repaired and the problems were rectified and the Laptop in question was handed over to the complainant  in full working condition.   Lastly on 8.9.2014 the complainant  approached Opposite Party No.5- authorized service centre of Opposite Party No. 2  for rectification of the problem in Laptop in question i.e.  shut down, graphic card slow and pirated window problem which have been fully rectified by Opposite Party No.5 and the Opposite Party No.5 told the complainant  so many times through his mobile phone as well as through e-mails to collect the Laptop fully repaired, from Opposite Party No.5, but the complainant  did not turn up. Even letter dated 29.10.2014 (Ex.OP2/5) has been issued by Opposite Party No.5 to the complainant  through registered post, but even then the complainant  did not turn up. The complainant  could not point out any inherent or manufacturing defect in the Laptop in question i.e. defect which is beyond repair. However, the Opposite Parties  are liable to repair the Laptop of the complainant  under the warranty and to replace the defective parts if any, and the Opposite Parties  have done so. The Opposite Parties  are only liable to repair and make the product fully functional to the satisfaction of the complainant  and they are not to replace the same or to refund its price until and unless the complainant  succeeds in proving  any inherent/ manufacturing defect in the product which is beyond repair and the complainant  has failed to do so.
12. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, we dispose of the complaint  with the directions to Opposite Party No.5- authorized service centre of Opposite Party No. 2  to repair the Laptop in question and make it fully functional to the satisfaction of the complainant  and hand over the same to the complainant, within one month from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The complainant  has to suffer due to the recurring fault in the Laptop in question and has to file the present complaint, therefore, the Opposite Party No. 2  is directed to pay the costs of litigation to the complainant,  to the tune of Rs.2,000/-.  Copies of the order be furnished to the parties free of cost. File is ordered to be consigned to the record room. Case could not be disposed of within the stipulated period due to heavy pendency of the cases in this Forum.

Dated: 24.11.2015.                                                    (Bhupinder Singh)                                                                                                  President

hrg                                                                 (Anoop Sharma)     

                                       Member