Haryana

Ambala

CC/246/2017

Mohit Kumar - Complainant(s)

Versus

Lenovo India Pvt Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

Deepak Kumar

01 May 2018

ORDER

 

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM AMBALA

 

                                                          Complaint case no.        : 246 of 2017

                                                          Date of Institution         : 18.07.2017

                                                          Date of decision   : 01.05.2018

 

 

Mohit Kumar son of Shri Vinod Kumar, resident of House No.1408, Sector-9, Ambala City.

……. Complainant.

Vs.

 

1.       Lenovo (India) Private Limited, Ferns Icon, Level 2, Doddenakundi Village, Marathahalli outer ring road, K.R.Puram Hobli, Banglore -560037, through its authorized signatory.

2.       Amazon India, Brigade Gateway, 8^th floor, 26/1, Dr. Rajkumar Road, Malleshwaram(W), Bangalore -56005, Karnataka, India through its authorized signatory.

3.       Okay Enterprises, Anjaneya Infrastructure Project No. 38 & 39, Soukya Road, Banglore Rural District Bangalore-560067, Karnataka, India through its authorized signatory.

4.       Lenovo Mobile Service Center, Prispin Enamor, Shop No.175, 1^st Floor, Bank Road, Ambala Cantt through its authorized signatory.

 

        ….….Opposite Parties.

 

 

Before:        Sh. D.N. Arora, President.

                   Sh. Pushpender Kumar, Member.

Ms. Anamika Gupta, Member.

                  

Present:       Sh. Deepak Kumar,  counsel for the complainant.

                   Sh. Avtar Singh, counsel for OP Nos.1 & 4.

Ms. Rekha Ahlawat, counsel for OP No.2.

OP No.3 proceeded ex parte v.o.d. 14.09.2017.

 

 

ORDER:

                    In nutshell, brief facts of the present complaint is that the complainant had purchased Lenovo mobile phone,  product no.PA2100002IN, Model-Lenovo A6020a40, color-silver, amounting to Rs.6,999/-from the OP No.2 vide invoice no.KA-BLR5-142538091-425618 and the OP No.3 also issued invoice for DwHmsMJIN dated 18.07.2016 in favour of complainant. After purchase of the said mobile phone, complainant notice that the same is not working properly, Battery backup and touch screen of mobile phone is not working properly. Then complainant made a complaint to OP No.2 on 05.01.2017 at 04.30 PM on toll free no 1800-3000-9009 they said that the complainant has been contacted by those who have been sold by OP No.3 then complainant made the complaint to OP No.3 but did not sufficient reply to him.  After that complainant made a complaint to OP No.1 on toll free number-1800-3000-7678 but they did not tackle his complaint and give the direction to OP No.4. Thereafter, complainant approached the service center i.e. OP No.4 and they issued job sheet to the complainant. OP No.4 has repaired the mobile phone of the complainant and change some parts of the mobile phone, but problem could not be rectified. The complainant approached to the OP No.4 for repair the mobile phone but they putting the matter on one pretext to other and just harassing the complainant. Due to unfair practice, rendered by Ops, complainant has suffered a lot of mental tension and agony and financial loss. Hence, the present complaint.

2.                Registered notice issued to OP No.3 but none has turned up on his behalf and he was proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 14.09.2017. Upon notice, OP No.1 & 4 appeared through counsel and tendered written statement and submitted that the warranty on every product, manufactured by the OP No.1 is subject to the terms and conditions of the warranty as contained in the service manual provided at the time of purchase of the product. They further submitted that the complainant has not chosen to follow the procedure as ascribed in the terms and conditions of warranty applicable to the product and has also failed to establish any manufacturing defect.

Upon notice, OP No.2 appeared through counsel and tendered written statement and submitted that the complainant has not bought any goods from ASSPL and it has acted as an intermediary only. Further the amount  paid  by the complainant is against an invoice raised by the seller of the product i.e. OP No.3 and the OP No.2 has no claim over the said amount. The goods have been bought by the complainant from an independent third party seller selling its products on the website operated by the OP No.2. The OP No.2 is neither a necessary nor a proper party in the complaint. Therefore, the Ops are not rendered any deficiency of services and unfair trade practice and prayed for dismissal of the present complaint.

3                 To prove his version complainant tendered his affidavit as Annexure C-X with documents as annexure C-1 & annexure C-10 and close his evidence. On the other hand, Counsel for the OP No.2 tendered affidavit as Annexure R/A with documents as Annexure R/1 to R/3 and close his evidence. Learned counsel for OP Nos.1 & 4 has tendered a statement that written statement on behalf of them be read as part of their evidence and closed their evidence. OP No.3 has proceeded ex-parte v.o.d. 14.09.2017.

4.                We have heard learned counsels for the both the parties and carefully gone through the case file. The case of complainant is that on 18.07.2016 the complainant  purchased Lenovo Mobile Phone, Product no.PA2100002IN, Model-Lenovo A6020a40, color-silver, amounting to Rs.6999/- from OP No.3 vide invoice no.KA-BLR5-142538091-425618 and the OP No.3 also issued invoice for DwHmsMJIN dated 18.07.2016 in favour  of complainant with one year warranty as  Annexure C-7 & Annexure C-8. After some time of the purchase, the mobile in question become defective in this regard, complainant approached to the OP No.4 for rectification of mobile but OP No.4 failed to redress the grievance of the complainant and issued the job sheet i.e. Annexure C-9 shows that the mobile set having problem i.e. touch, battery, mike and the version of complainant duly supported by his affidavit reveals that the defects of the mobile set could not be rectified by Op No.4 being a service centre.

5.                From the material available on the case file it is ample clear that there is no specific allegations against the Op No.2 because it has acted as intermediary service provider and as per Section 79 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 the service of the Op No.2 is exempted and only the seller is liable for any discrepancy qua the sold product. It is strange that OP No.3 after selling the product in question did not bother to redress the grievance of the complainant forcing him to approach this Forum but the seller/OP No.3 did not appear before this Forum despite notice and remained ex-parte. The OP No.4  has  not file any separate written statement nor controvert the averments of the complainant by way of filing of affidavit whenever counsel of OP No.1 has argued the case on behalf of  op No.4 also.  The allegations made by the complainant  against OP No.4 has gone unrebutted.

6.                In view of above discussion, we have no hitch to reach a conclusion that OP Nos. 1, 3 & 4 are deficient in service and  therefore, the  present complaint deserves acceptance against Op Nos.1, 3 & 4 only. Hence, the present complaint against OP No.2  is dismissed and allowed against Op Nos.1, 3 & 4 with costs and they are  directed to comply with the following direction within thirty days from receipt of copy of the order:-

1. To replace the Mobile set in question with a new one of the same model. If the same model is not available then to refund the cost of mobile set to the tune of Rs.6,999/- as per Annexure C-1 along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of complaint till its realization subject to returning the mobile in question to the Ops.

 

2. Also to pay a sum of Rs.3,000/- on account of cost of proceedings as assessed above.

 

Copy of this order be sent to the parties concerned, free of costs, as per rules. File after due compliance be consigned to record room.

Announced on : 01.05.2018

                    

 

 

 (PUSHPENDER KUMAR)       (ANAMIKA  GUPTA)          (D.N. ARORA)

Member                          Member                                 President