Punjab

Sangrur

CC/111/2017

Vikas Goyal - Complainant(s)

Versus

Laptop World - Opp.Party(s)

Sh.Sandeep Goyal

10 Jul 2017

ORDER

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SANGRUR

                             

                                                                         Complaint no. 111                                                                                         

                                                                        Instituted on:   24.03.2017            

                                                                       Decided on:    10.07.2017

 

Vikas Goyal son of Nanu Ram resident of Ward No.1, Grid Colony, Moonak, Tehsil Moonak, District Sangrur.        

                                                …. Complainant

                                Versus

 

1.     Laptop World SCO 72 Sector 20C Chandigarh 160020 through its proprietor.  

 

2.    HP India Customer Care 24 Salarpuria Arena Adugodi, Hosur Road, Bangalore District Bangalore, Karnataka  India 560030, through its Chairman/ Managing Director.

 

3.     Hewlett Packard Ltd HP Corporate Office, 24 Salarpuria Arena, Adugodi, Hosur Road, Bangalore, District Bangalore, Karnataka India, 560030 through its Chairman/ Managing Director.                                                                          ….Opposite parties.

 

FOR THE COMPLAINANT      :     Shri Sandip Goyal, Advocate                          

 

FOR OPP. PARTY NO.1          :      Exparte                         

 

FOR OPP. PARTIESNo.2&3     :     Shri Rahul Sharma, Advocate.

 

Quorum

         

                    Sukhpal Singh Gill, President

Sarita Garg, Member

Vinod Kumar Gulati, Member    

 

 

 

ORDER:  

 

Sukhpal Singh Gill, President

 

1.             Vikas Goyal, complainant has preferred the present complaint against the opposite parties (referred to as OPs in short) on the ground that he purchased a Laptop  bearing model LAPTOP HP TS 15-B140TX 5CD3257NXV on 30.10.2013  from OP No.1 for an amount of Rs.47000/- vide invoice  dated 30.10.2013 under three years warranty.  Laptop in question was running in satisfactory condition in beginning but in the month of June 2016 it started giving problem of hanging. Thereafter in July 2016  the complainant called the OPs on toll free number on which they told that there is problem of widow but even after update the window the problem was not cured.  On 25.08.2016  complainant again called the toll free number of the OPs and told that they had lodged the complaint.  The complainant again and again calling and sending mails to the OPs to solve the problem but no one on behalf of the OPs come to the site of complainant. Thus, alleging deficiency in service on the part of OPs, the complainant has sought following reliefs:-

i)      OPs be directed to pay Rs.47000/- with interest or give new laptop,

ii)     OPs be directed to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs.30000/- as compensation   on account of mental agony, harassment,

iii)   OPs be directed to pay Rs.10000/- as litigation expenses.

2.             Despite service OP no.1 did not appear and as such OP no.1 is proceeded exparte.

3.             In reply filed by the OPs no.2&3,  preliminary objections on the grounds of maintainability and suppression of material facts have been taken up. It is submitted that on 30.10.2013  the complainant  purchased said laptop from the OP no.1 under  three years warranty. It is submitted that  there is no case logged in respect of the laptop during July 2016 as alleged by the complainant, however the complaint had logged a complaint during August 2016 to toll free number reporting operating system issue in the laptop.  On receipt  of the complaint  the tech support team  of the OP had attended to the same promptly and resolved  the reported issue by resetting the operating system as per the terms of the warranty. The complainant again on 29.08.2016 had reported issues in the laptop against which  the service team had sought or IDR i.e. Image Diagnostics report which is run in the unit to capture hardware details in a log form and analyzed to get into the root cause of issue which was required by the service team  to elevate  any technical concern to higher engineering team and also to carry out further EMT works but the complainant has not furnished the details sought for to enable the OP to resolve the issue.  It is further submitted that  the laptop  has no known  issue or any manufacturing defect or the technical fault in the laptop as alleged by the complainant.  Thus, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the Ops no.2&3.

4.             The complainant in his evidence has tendered documents Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-5 and closed evidence. On the other hand, OPs have tendered an affidavit Ex.OPs2&3/1 and closed evidence.   

5.             From the perusal of documents placed on the file and after hearing the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties, we find that he purchased a Laptop  bearing model LAPTOP HP TS 15-B140TX 5CD3257NXV on 30.10.2013  from OP No.1 for an amount of Rs.47000/- vide invoice  dated 30.10.2013 under three years warranty.  It is alleged by the complainant that Laptop in question was running in satisfactory condition from the very beginning but in the month of June 2016 it started giving problem of hanging. Thereafter in July 2016  the complainant called the OPs on toll free number on which they told that there is problem of widow but even after update the window the problem was not cured.  It is further stated by the complainant that on 25.08.2016  complainant again called the toll free number of the OPs and told that they had lodged the complaint.  The complainant again and again calling and sending mails to the OPs to solve the problem but no one on behalf of the OPs came to the site of complainant.

6.             In support of his case, the complainant has produced on record copies of emails Ex.C-2 and report of expert alongwith his affidavit Ex.C-3 and Ex.C-4 respectively wherein he opined that after examining without opening  the laptop  he found that the Laptop in question was not working properly and it seemed to be hardware failure  which cannot be cured without opening it.  It is not the case of the complainant that there is a manufacturing defect in the Laptop in question.  Moreover,  the expert  of the complainant has also stated in his report that  he found that  Laptop in question was not working properly and it seemed to be hardware failure which cannot be cured  without opening it meaning thereby the laptop in question  has no manufacturing defect and  it can be cured by repair. It is not in dispute that the laptop in question is under warranty when the complainant approached the OPs for removing the defect in the laptop.  Moreover, OPs have also stated in their written reply that they are/ were ready to repair the laptop in question as per terms and conditions of the warranty. During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the Ops has also stated that the complainant can supply the laptop in question to him for removal of the defect in it, if desired.

7.             For the reasons recorded above, we partly allow the complaint of the complainant and direct the OPs no.2 and 3 to repair the laptop in question of the complainant as per terms and condition of the warranty.  The laptop can be supplied to the learned counsel for the OPs no.2 and 3 for repair purpose. We further order the OPs no.2 and 3 to pay to the complainant consolidated amount of compensation of Rs.2000/- on account of mental pain, agony and harassment and  litigation expenses.

8.             This order of ours shall be complied with  within 30 days from the receipt of copy of the order.  Copy of the order be supplied to the parties free of charge. File be consigned to records in due course.                  

                Announced

                July 10, 2017

 

 

 

(Vinod Kumar Gulati) ( Sarita Garg)   (Sukhpal Singh Gill)                                                                                                                      Member            Member                         President