D.O.F:22/12/2020
D.O.O:31/05/2022
IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION KASARAGOD
CC.No.178/2020
Dated this, the 31th day of May 2022
PRESENT:
SRI.KRISHNAN.K : PRESIDENT
SRI.RADHAKRISHNAN NAIR.M: MEMBER
SMT.BEENA.K.G : MEMBER
Prof. Louis D’Rose
Naikayum Thatu, Parappa : Complainant
Kasaragod – 671533
(Adv: T.V.Vijayan)
And
Jaison P.J
PC ZONE Koluvally
Cherupuzha – P.O
Kannur – 6750511 :Opposite Party – 1
(Adv: Amith)
DELL INTERNATIONAL SERVICES INDIA PVT.LTD
Divyashree Greens
Koramangala, Inner Ring Road : Opposite Party No:2
Domlur – P.O
Bangalore – 560071
Karnataka State
(Adv: A. Radhakrishnan)
ORDER
SRI.KRISHNAN.K : PRESIDENT
The case of the complainant is that he purchased a Laptop from Opposite Party No:1 by paying Rs. 32019/-. At the time of sale of Laptop, the seller had issued the warranty of sales and service but bill is not issued. The product developed technical defects on 05/02/2020. He went to Opposite Party No.1 for service. But failed to repair it. He reported to another technician and he rectified it. Thus he suffered monitory loss. Since he could not use service of computer for online tution classes. On 09/09/2020 the system started malfunctioning and though tried to contact Opposite Party No: 1, his where about not known. On 10/09/2020he contacted the manufacturer. But due to covid pandemic no service engineer made available. On 11/09/2020 he contacted the dealer. Dealer sent a technician but replied it is a software problem thus both Opposite Party 1 and Opposite Party No: 2 are responsible for deficiency in service. The complainant constrained to cancel his scheduled interviews for overseas firms. The complainant needs replacement of Laptop, along with compensation for damages from Opposite Party No:1 and 2 and cost of the litigation.
2. For Opposite Party No:1 Adv: Ganaraj filed vakalath and version. Opposite Party No:1 denied sale of computer to complainant; and also denied having received Rs. 32,019/- on 07/01/2020 without bill. The Opposite Party No:1 denied having contacted by complainant. Liability to service computer denied, that responsibility of repair or service to computer denied. And also contended that there is no deficiency in service for their part and complainant is not eligible for any relief in the complaint and prayed for dismissal of the complaint. The Opposite Party No:2 filed written version, Opposite Party No:2 taking note of its good will , offered replacement of system as per e-mail reply Dt: 31/03/2021, having higher specification accepted by complainant by E-mail Dt: 08/04/2021. The Opposite Party No: 2 say complainant purchased Dell laptop from Opposite Party No:1 for Rs. 32019/- on 07/01/2020. Opposite Party re –iterated its under taking to provide the complainant a laptop with higher specifications as good will gesture.
3. The complainant filed chief affidavit Ext A1 to A4 series marked. Ext A1 is quotation, Ext A2 is invoice, Ext A3 series are E-mail communications and Ext A4 series is cash bill. The complainant was cross and examined and one witness also examined from his part as Pw2. Opposite Party No:1 filed chief affidavit and was cross examined Dw1.
The Complainant and Opposite Parties argued in details and filed argument notes.
Considering the rival contentions and evidence on record, following points arise for considerations are:
- Whether there is any deficiency in service of Opposite Parties?
- Whether complainant is entitled for the reliefs sought in the complaint?
- If so for what reliefs?
The grievance of the complainant is that he purchased one Laptop but it developed some defects. Complainant approached the Opposite Parties and requested for removal of defects from the laptop. On the request of Opposite Party, Laptop was handover to him. Who returned after repairs .
Complainant submitted that defects were rectified finally during March 2018. Thereafter computer started working properly. Further case is that computer again stopped its function; thereby it could not be used effectively thereafter.
The Complainant has no case that after warranty period or after it stopped functioning during March 2018, he took the computer to the dealer for service. Computer is kept with the complainant. No case that defects if any is reported to the Opposite Party after during March 2018.
The complainant has not alleged that there is any inherent manufacturing defect in the Laptop, which is not curable and by selling a defective Lap top to the complainant , the Opposite Party have committed gross deficiency in service and have also resorted to unfair trade practice. But specific case is that Opposite Party cheated the complainant.
It is settled law that the onus to prove Manufacturing defects in the product lies on the complainant and complainant has to discharge the said burden by adducing cogent and reliable evidence in this regard. In the present case, the complainant has not produced any expert evidence/opinion to show that there is an inherent manufacturing defect in the Laptop and the said default is not curable. Merely because the laptop was taken to the authorized service centre of the manufacturing company is no ground to be presumed to hold that there is manufacturing defect in the laptop. But in the instant case, on perusing the documents and evidence on record it seems that Opposite Party No:1 failed to provide proper after sales service to complainant by which complainant suffered mental agony and financial loss that also within in the warranty period. Hence we find that in supplying an assembled system without specifically informing the consumer that laptop supplied is an assembled system and in not rectifying the defects and in not even undertaking to clear the default in case computer is brought for repairs amounts to deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party. Thus complainant is entitled to compensation and cost of the litigation thereof. Further the Opposite Party No:2, as a good will gesture assured a brand new Laptop of high quality to the complainant.
In the result complaint is partly allowed directing Opposite Party No: 1 and 2 jointly pay Rs.5, 000/-(Rupees Five thousand only) as compensation for deficiency in service and amount Rs. 3000/- (Rupees Three thousand only) as the cost of litigation and Opposite Party No: 2 is directed to supply and provide a good quality brand new computer as assured by them and on receiving the new computer, complainant is directed to surrender the defective Laptop to Opposite Party No: 2 as replacement thereof within 30 days of the receipt of the order.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
Exhibits
A1- Quotation
A2- Invoice
A3- series. E mail communications
A4- series. Cash bill
Witness Examined
Pw1- Prof. Louis D’ Rose
Pw2- Jayesh Paikkatle
Dw1- Jaison.P.J
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
Forwarded by Order
Assistant Registrar
Ps/
