DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BHIWANI.

   CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO.175 of 15

                                       DATE OF INSTITUTION: - 15-06.2015

                                                               DATE OF ORDER: 29-11-2016

Vikas Gupta son of Shri Vinay Kumar Gupta, Proprietor Aggarwal Traders, near Jogiwala Mandir, Loharu Road, Bhiwani, Tehsil & District Bhiwani.

              ……………Complainant.

VERSUS                     

1. Jeenu Gift Shop 52, Adrash College Market, Hansi Gate, Bhiwani through its Proprietor.

1. Lenovo India Pvt. Ltd., Vatika Business Park, 1^st Floor, Badshapur Road, Sector-49, Gurgaon-122001.

………….. Opposite Parties.

COMPLAINT U/S 12 & 13 OF CONSUMER PROECTION ACT

BEFORE: -      Shri Rajesh Jindal, President.

Mrs. Sudesh, Member.

Present:-   Sh. D.K. Gupta, Advocate for complainant.

                 OP no. 1 exparte.

      Sh. S.S. Saini, Advocate for OP no. 2.

ORDER:-

Rajesh Jindal, President:

                        In brief, the grievance of the complainant is that on dated 27.07.2014 he had purchased one Lenovo Tab from OP no. 1 for consideration of Rs. 8750/- with one year guarantee and warranty.  It is alleged that on the next day of purchase, the complainant pushed the button to start Tab it would not start.  The complainant visited to the shop of OP no. 1 many a times but to no avail.  He served a legal notice dated 03.09.2014 to OPs.  The complainant further alleged that due to the act and conduct of the Ops he has to suffer mental agony, financial loss and physical harassment. Hence the complainant was deprived of use of the Hand Set and suffered a loss.  Now the complainant has claimed the compensation and costs by way of filing present complaint.

2.                     OP no. 1 has failed to come present.  Hence he was proceeded against exparte vide order dated 14.08.2015.

3.                     Opposite party no. 2 on appearance filed written statement alleging therein that the complainant has visited only the Dealer or the OP no. 1 for solution to the issue with his Tablet and there is no records found with the authorized service centre of answering opposite party.  It is submitted that the complainant having purchased the tablet for commercial purpose is ‘not a consumer’ and as such is not entitled to file the present complaint before the Consumer Forum.  Hence, in view of the facts and circumstances mentioned above, there is no deficiency in service on the part of OP no. 2 and complaint of the complainant is liable to be dismissed with costs.

4.                     In order to make out his case, the counsel for complainant has tendered into evidence documents Annexure C-1 to Annexure C-16A.

5.                     In reply thereto, the counsel for OP no. 2 has tendered into evidence affidavit Exhibit R2/A. 

6.                     We have gone through the record of the case carefully and have heard the counsel for complainant and counsel for the OP no. 2.

7.                     The counsel for the complainant  reiterated the contents of the complaint.  He submitted that the Lenovo Tablet did not work properly since the date of the purchase.  The complainant visited the Ops several times to rectify the defects of the Tablet.  He submitted that the complainant also got served legal notice dated 03.09.2014 on the Ops.  The said legal notice was replied by the OP no. 2 demanding the details of Tablet alongwith contact number etc.  The required information was sent by the complainant to OP no. 1.  Still the OP no. 2 failed to redress the grievance of the complainant.  In support of his contention he referred the letters of copies Annexure C-6 and C-7 and e-mails sent by the complainant to the OP Annexure C-8 to C-16.

8.                    The counsel for OP no. 2 reiterated the contents of the reply.  He submitted that the complainant should have visited the service centre of the company to rectify the defects of the Tablet.

9.                     In the light of the pleadings and arguments of the parties, we have examined the material on record.  Admittedly, there is two letters dated 22.09.2014 and 28.10.2014 Annexure C-6 and C-7 issued by the OP no. 2 to the counsel of the complainant, wherein no advice has been given to the complainant to visit the service centre of the company.  Considering the facts of the case, we are of the view that the Ops have failed to render services being the seller and manufacturer of the Tablet so we hold them guilty of deficiency in service.  We allow the complaint of the complainant and direct the Ops to refund Rs. 8500/- to the complainant against the Tablet in question.  The complainant is directed to deliver the Tablet in question to the Ops and thereafter the Ops are directed to pay Rs. 8500/- to the complainant within 30 days.  Certified copies of the order be sent to the parties free of costs.  File be consigned to the record room, after due compliance.

Announced in open Forum.

Dated:29-11-2016.   

                                                                                                  (Rajesh Jindal)

                                                                                                       President,           

                                                                                         District Consumer Disputes

                                                                                         Redressal Forum, Bhiwani.

                                      (Sudesh)

                                      Member