In the Court of the
Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Unit -I, Kolkata,
8B, Nelie Sengupta Sarani, 4th Floor, Kolkata-700087.
CDF/Unit-I/Case No. 227 / 2009.
1) Sri Sanjeev Anand,
25B, Camac Street, Kolkata-700016. ---------- Complainant
---Versus---
1) Manager-representing, Hewlett Packard India Sales Pvt. Ltd.,
Vikas Building (1st Floor), 1, Dr. U.N. Brahmachari Street,
P.S. Shakespeare Sarani, Kolkata-700016.
2) Manager-representing Cyber Works Division,
Francies Klein & Co. Pvt. Ltd.,
10A, Hamanta Basu Sarani, Kolkata-700009.
3) Manager-representing R.T. Outsourcing Services Ltd.,
Vikas Building (1st Floor), 1, Dr. U.N. Brahmachari Street,
P.S. Shakespeare Sarani, Kolkata-16. ---------- Opposite Parties
Present : Sri Sankar Nath Das, President.
Dr. Subir Kumar Chaudhuri, Member.
Smt. Sharmi Basu, Member
Order No. 25 Dated 15/05/2012.
The petition of complaint has been filed by the complainant Sri Sanjeev Anand against the o.ps. Hewlett Packard India Sales Pvt. Ltd. and others. The fact of the case in short is that complainant purchased a laptop from o.p. no.2 and no warranty card was handed over to complainant despite repeated requests by complainant. On 15.11.08 complainant placed the laptop to o.p. no.3 for some problems and further on 11.10.08 on examination the servicemen, complainant was reported by the men of o.p. no.3 that the laptop had some problems DVD R/W Player Hard Disc (HDD) and those parts are to be replaced. Complainant stated that the men of o.p. no.3 reported him totally different problem other than earlier. Hence, the instant case for vigorous harassment and for replacement and/or refund of the purchase money of the laptop in question.
o.p. nos.1 and 2 had entered their appearance in this case by filing w/v and denied all the material allegations labeled against them and prayed for dismissal of the case. O.p. no.3 did not contest this case by filing w/v and accordingly, matter was heard ex parte as against o.p. no.3.
Decision with reasons:-
We have gone through the pleadings of the parties, evidence and documents in particular. It is an admitted position that complainant had purchased the laptop in question. It is the case of the complainant that warranty card was not issued at the time of the purchase of the goods in question to the complainant and o.ps. had failed to produce any document showing issuance of warranty card acceptable to this Forum, although the case of o.ps. as it appears from the record that they had issued warranty card. In the instant case o.p. no.1 is manufacturer, o.p. no.2 is dealer and o.p. no.3 is service centre of o.p. no.1. In the contact of the above and on perusal of the entire materials on record we hold that o.ps. had gross deficiency in service so far as goods, since the goods in question had inherent manufacturing defects to its consumer / complainant.
Hence, ordered,
That the petition of complaint is allowed on contest in part with cost against o.p. nos.1 and 2 and ex parte with cost against o.p. no.3. All o.ps. are hereby directed to refund the purchase amount of the laptop after deducting depreciation cost of Rs.3000/- (Rupees three thousand) only together with interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of filing of the instant case dt.18.6.09 till the date of payment. O.ps. are also jointly and/or severally directed to pay to the complainant Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) only as compensation for harassment and mental agony and litigation cost of Rs.2000/- (Rupees two thousand) only within 45 days from the date of communication of this order, i.d. an interest @ 9% shall accrue over the entire sum due to the credit of the complainant till full realization.
After receipt of the aforesaid amount awarded to complainant, complainant is strictly directed to refund the original laptop in question to o.ps. after proper receipt within 30 days from the receipt of the total awarded sum as ordered above if lying with the complainant.
Supply certified copy of this order to the parties.
_____Sd-____ _____Sd-______ _____Sd-_______
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
