Kerala

StateCommission

A/15/808

DISTRICT OFFICE IT SCHOOL - Complainant(s)

Versus

JYOTHI G K - Opp.Party(s)

M NIZARUDHEEN

31 Mar 2016

ORDER

KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL

COMMISSION  VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

APPEAL NO. 808/15

JUDGMENT DATED:31.03.2016

 

PRESENT : 

JUSTICE SHRI. P.Q. BARKATHALI                         :  PRESIDENT

SHRI.V.V. JOSE                                                          : MEMBER

 

District Office,

IT @ School, Malappuram,                                               : APPELLANT

Malappuram, PIN-676 505.

 

(By Adv: Sri. M. Nizarudheen)

 

            Vs.

 

1.         Jyothi.G.K,

P.D. Teacher,

GMUP School, Chirayil P.O,

Chirayil (via) Knodotty,

Malappuram-673 638,

Pandikkat Post, Aykkarappadi,

Malappuram-683 657.

                                                                                                : RESPONDENTS

2.         R P Info Systems Pvt. Ltd.,

Aysha Tower, 43/2614,

K & K 5 Sastha Temple Road,

Kaloor, Kochi-18, Now Functioning at its-

Corporate Office, 4^th floor, Regent House-12,

Govt. Palace (East), Kolkata-700 069.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

JUDGMENT

JUSTICE SHRI.  P.Q. BARKATH  ALI,  PRESIDENT

This is an appeal filed by the  2^nd opposite party in CC.97/14 on the file of Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Malappuram challenging the order of the Forum dated February 22, 2015, directing the 2^nd opposite party to refund the price of the laptop of Rs.17,770/- with interest along with a compensation of Rs.10,000/-.

2.      The case of the complainant as detailed in the complaint in brief is this:-

Complainant is a school teacher in G.M. School, Chirayil, Kondotty.  He purchased a Chirag branded laptop for a consideration of Rs.17,770/- under the Lap top/Net book of Teachers Scheme conducted by IT @ School from the office of the 2^nd opposite party.  Immediately after purchase it has become defective.  Opposite parties cured the defects. But unfortunately the defect continued.  Though it was reported to the opposite parties they did not respond properly.  Therefore complainant filed the complaint for return of the price of the Laptop and claimed compensation.

3.      Only the 2^nd opposite party contested the matter before the Forum.  First opposite party, M/s R.P. Info Systems Private Limited remained absent before the Forum and was set exparte.  2^nd opposite party in their version denied the allegations in the complaint, but admitted the purchase of the laptop by the complainant and further contented thus before the Forum.  This opposite party has only arranged a common platform to the teachers’ community and various companies to provide lap top for cheaper prices and this opposite party has no consumer relationship with the complainant.  Therefore complaint has to be dismissed.

4.      On the side of the complainant he filed proof affidavit and marked Exts.A1 and A2 before the Forum and the opposite parties 1 and 2 marked Ext. B1 copy of the circular dated, January 19, 2011 issued by the Executive Director, IT @ School project, Trivandrum.  On an appreciation of evidence Forum found that there is deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties and they were directed to refund the price of the lap top Rs.17,770/- with interest and a compensation of Rs.10,000/-.  Second opposite party has now come up in appeal challenging the said order of the Forum.

5.      Heard both the counsels.  The second respondent/first opposite party remained absent in this appeal.

6.      The following points arise for consideration:-

1. Whether there was any deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties?
2. Whether the impugned order of the Forum can be sustained?

7.      The counsel for the appellants argued that they have nothing to do with the sale and warranty assured to the complainant by the company who supplied the lap top and that therefore for the defect caused to the lap top, they cannot be made responsible.   There is no substance in the above contention.  The purchase of the lap top from the first opposite party, under the Lap top/Net book for the teachers’ scheme conducted by the 2^nd opposite party is admitted.  The document produced by the complainant show that the same is defective.  Admittedly the lap tops are supplied under the Lap top/Net book for the teachers’ scheme conducted by the 2^nd opposite party and it was on their instigation complainant purchased the lap top.  Therefore the appellant cannot be now contend that they have nothing to do the transaction.  As the lap top has become defective and completely useless the opposite parties are bound to either replace the same or to pay the price of the same to the complainant.  The finding of the Forum on this point is confirmed.

8.      Forum has directed the opposite parties to refund the price of the lap top Rs.17,770/- with interest along with compensation of Rs.10,000/-.  We find no ground to interfere with the said finding of the Forum.

In the result appeal is dismissed with a cost of Rs.5000/-.

 

JUSTICE P.Q. BARKATHALI       :  PRESIDENT

 

 

V.V. JOSE : MEMBER

 

VL.