Order dictated by:

Ms.Rachna Arora, Member

1.       Ripudaman Singh, complainant has brought the instant complaint under section 12 & 13 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 on the allegations that   the complainant purchased one Laptop from opposite party No.2 vide Invoice No.07067 dated 29.10.2015. The said Laptop became non functional  as it become hang and there exists problem of slow processing and heat up since 18.8.2016. Complaints in this regard were made with opposite party No.3 several times i.e. on 21.9.2016, 22.9.2016, 29.9.2016 and also on 13.10.2016. The opposite party tried to rectify the defect but couldn’t succeed and returned the same without rectifying the said defects. Lastly the complainant made last complaint to the opposite party on 22.10.2016 which is still pending. The act of the opposite parties in not repairing the laptop to the satisfaction of the complainant despite warranty period  amounts to deficiency in service , as well as unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite parties. Vide instant complaint, complainant has sought for the following reliefs:-

(a)     Opposite parties be directed to set right the laptop of the complainant to the satisfaction of the complainant or in the alternative to replace the same with new one of same make or upgraded model or to refund the price of Rs. 29550/- alongwith interest @ 12% p.a. from 29.10.2015 till realization ;

(b)     Compensation to the tune of Rs. 50000/- alongwith adequate litigation expenses were also demanded.

Hence, this complaint.

2.       Upon notice, opposite party No.1 appeared and filed written version in which it was submitted that the problem in the laptop was reported on 18.8.2016 which was duly rectified by part replacement free of cost under warranty and the laptop was returned to the complainant on 25.8.2016. It was denied that opposite party tried to rectify the defects but couldn’t succeed. It was stated that whenever problems were reported, it was duly resolved. It was denied that any problem was reported to the service centre on 21.9.2016 and 29.9.2016. As per the record of the opposite parties, there was no issue reported on said dates. It was submitted that as per the record of the opposite party the power issue was reported by the complainant on 22.9.2016 which was duly rectified free of cost under warranty and the laptop was returned to the complainant on 2.10.2016. It was denied that problem reported on 22.10.2016 is pending till date. The problem reported on 22.10.2016 was duly rectified and laptop was returned on 26.10.2016. It was submitted that whenever any issue was reported to the service centre the same was duly rectified  to the satisfaction of the complainant  and now the laptop is out of warranty and cannot be repaired free of cost. While denying and controverting other allegations, dismissal of complaint was prayed.

3.       Opposite parties No.2 & 3 did not opt to put in appearance as such they were ordered to be proceeded against ex-parte.

4.       In his bid to prove the case Sh.Deepinder Singh,Adv.counsel for the complainant tendered into evidence duly sworn affidavit of the complainant Ex.C-1, copy of invoice Ex.C-2, copy of complaint schedule Ex.C-3 and closed the evidence on behalf of the complainant.

5.       To rebut the aforesaid evidence Sh.J.S.Samra,Adv.counsel for opposite party No.1 tendered into evidence duly sworn affidavit of Sh.Sourav Ganguly Ex.OP1/A, copy of resolution Ex.OP1/1, copy of Lenovo Limited Warranty Ex.OP1/2 and closed the evidence on behalf of opposite party No.1.

6.       We have heard the ld.counsel for the parties and have carefully gone through the record on the file.

7.       On the basis of the evidence, ld.counsel for opposite party No.1 has vehemently contended that the complainant  lodged complaint regarding defects in Laptop on 18.8.2016  and the same problem was rectified  on the same day by replacing part, free of cost and the laptop was returned to the complainant on 25.8.2016. It has further been contended that whenever problems were reported, it was duly resolved. The problem reported on 22.10.2016 was duly rectified and laptop was returned on 26.10.2016. It has further been contended that whenever any issue was reported to the service centre the same was duly rectified  to the satisfaction of the complainant  and now the laptop is out of warranty and cannot be repaired free of cost.

8.       But, however from the appreciation of the facts and circumstances of the case, it becomes evident that  complainant lodged complaints on 21.9.2016, 22.9.2016, 29.9.2016  as well as on 13.10.2016 and  every time the opposite party after keeping the laptop with them , returned the same without rectifying the defects therein. Lastly the complainant lodged complaint on 22.10.2016 but the opposite party did not rectify the defect in the laptop and the same is pending till date. In this regard complainant has placed on record copy of complaint schedule Ex.C-3 which was though on simple paper but the complainant has mentioned complaint numbers on such dates, which proves that such complaint numbers were given by the opposite parties to the complainant while lodging complaints regarding defects in the laptop to the opposite parties . The opposite party did not produce any evidence to rebut the aforesaid evidence in the shape of complaint schedule Ex.C-3 .  As such the plea of the opposite party that the problem reported on 22.10.2016 was duly rectified and laptop was returned on 26.10.2016, is not tenable as the opposite party has not placed on record any evidence that the laptop was duly delivered to the complainant on 26.10.2016 after removing the defects therein. As such the version of the complainant that he lodged several complaints , which were during warranty period,  on the dates mentioned above is proved to be correct However, the opposite party denied the fact of lodging complaints to service centre on 21.9.2016 and 29.9.2016 but has admitted that complainant lodged complaints regarding defect in laptop to the service centre on 18.8.2016 , 22.9.2016 as well as on 22.10.2016 which proves that the laptop became defective during warranty period.  As such the complainant has approached the opposite party with the alleged problem in the laptop within the warranty period though after expiry of ten months.  As such, the complainant is entitled to repair of the laptop in dispute to the satisfaction at the end of opposite parties.

9.       Consequently, instant complaint succeeds and  opposite parties are directed to repair the Laptop in dispute to the satisfaction of the complainant without charging any amount within a period of one month of the receipt of copy of the order. In case of failure of the opposite parties to remove the defects in the laptop to the satisfaction of the complainant, opposite parties are liable to refund the price of the laptop to the complainant. The complainant is also awarded Rs. 3000/- as compensation besides cost of litigation are assessed at Rs. 2000/-. If compliance of the order is not made within the stipulated period, complainant shall be at liberty to get the order executed through the indulgence of this Forum. Case could not be disposed of within the stipulated period due to heavy pendency of the cases in this Forum. Copies of the orders be furnished to the parties free of costs. File is ordered to be consigned to the record room.

Announced in Open Forum

Dated : 2.8.2017