Chandigarh

DF-I

CC/451/2016

Rohtash - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s Dell - Opp.Party(s)

Lakhbir Singh

20 Jul 2018

ORDER

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-I,

U.T. CHANDIGARH

========

 

                                     

Consumer Complaint No.	:	CC/451/2016
Date of Institution	:	21/06/2016
Date of Decision	:	20/07/2018

 

Rohtash son of Sh. Ram Charan, Resident of Village Buhawa, District Kurukshetra, Haryana, Presently residing at H.No.1936/BO1, Village Kansal, District Mohali, Punjab.

…..Complainant

                                   

V E R S U S

 

[1]     M/s Dell, Plot No.40-A, Quark City, Industrial Area, Phase-8B, Mohali, through its Manager.

[2]     V. Net Computers, SCO 48-49, 1^st Floor, Sector 9-D, Chandigarh, through its Proprietor.

[3]     Swastik Computers, Dell Authorized Service Center, SCO 99-100, 1^st Floor, Sector 17-D, Chandigarh, through its Manager/ Representative.

 …… Opposite Parties

QUORUM:	SH.RATTAN SINGH THAKUR	PRESIDENT
	MRS.SURJEET KAUR	MEMBER
	SH.SURESH KUMAR SARDANA	MEMBER

                       

ARGUED BY	:	None for Complainant.
		Sh. Vivek Sethi, Counsel for OPs No.1 & 3.
		Sh. J.D.S. Sarin, Counsel for OP No.2.

 

PER SURESH KUMAR SARDANA, MEMBER

1.         Shri Rohtash, Complainant has preferred this Consumer Complaint u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, against M/s Dell and Others (hereinafter called the Opposite Parties), alleging that he purchased a Laptop (Dell 3546 I5 4/1tb/dvdw/n-vindia/15.6”) amounting to Rs.42,525/- from Opposite Party No.2 vide Bill dated 28.3.2015. In the month of Dec. 2015, the said Laptop started giving re-starting problem. Accordingly, the Laptop was given to Opposite Party No.3 for repairs on 21.12.2015, 15.01.2016 and eventually, on 22.03.2016 (Annexure C-4) when while returning the Laptop on 01.04.2016 (Annexure C-5) Opposite Party No.3 demanded Rs.17,700/- for replacement of parts because the warranty had elapsed. According to the Complainant, when the Laptop was given to Opposite Party No.3 on 22.03.2016 the same was well within the warranty period and the Opposite Parties have deliberately elapsed the said warranty for the reasons best known to them. With the cup of woes brimming, the Complainant has filed the instant consumer complaint, alleging that the aforesaid acts amount to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the Opposite Parties.
2.         Notice of the complaint was sent to Opposite Parties seeking their version of the case.
3.         Opposite Parties No.1 & 3 contested the claim of the Complainant by filing their joint reply, inter alia, pleading that the Complainant contacted the Opposite Party No.3 on 25.03.2016 regarding battery related issue. The Opposite Party No.3 could not assist the Complainant with battery replacement as the warranty of said Laptop had already expired. Prior to March 2016, the Complainant had reported minor issue of troubleshooting which was always rectified by the answering Opposite Parties well on time. Pleading that there is no deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on their part, Opposite Parties No.1 & 3 have prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
4.         Opposite Party No.2 in its reply has pleaded that the Complainant did purchase the Laptop in question from it. It is the responsibility of the Opposite Party No.1 to provide after sale service, being the manufacturer of the Laptop, which fact has also been mentioned on the left side corner of the retail invoice (Annexure A-2). The answering Opposite Party has unnecessarily been impleaded as party in the present Complaint. Pleading that there is no deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on its part, Opposite Party No.2 has prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
5.         Controverting the allegations contained in the written statements and reiterating the pleadings in the Complaint, the Complainant filed the replications.
6.         The parties led evidence in support of their contentions.
7.         We have gone through the entire evidence and heard the arguments addressed by the Ld. Counsel for the Opposite Parties.
8.         Admittedly, the Laptop in question was purchased by the Complainant on 28.03.2015 and was having a warranty of one year. There is also no dispute about the fact that the subject Laptop was given to the Dell Authorized Service Centre on 22.03.2016 i.e. within the warranty period. The said Laptop was returned to the Complainant on 01.04.2016, without carrying out necessary repairs, citing the reason of expiration of warranty; whereas, the Laptop was submitted for necessary repairs to the Authorized Service Centre within the warranty period. Hence, we are not inclined to believe the version of the Opposite Parties No.1 & 3. It is apparent that the Opposite Parties No.1 & 3 have deliberately made the warranty to elapse to the detriment of the Complainant. It is thus established beyond all reasonable doubts that the complaint of the Complainant is genuine. The harassment suffered by the Complainant is also writ large. Thus, finding a definite deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties No.1 & 3, we have no other alternative, but to allow the present complaint against them. As the Laptop was used by the Complainant for around 11 months, therefore, we deem it appropriate to deduct 50% of the invoice amount towards depreciation.
9.         In the light of above observations, we are of the concerted view that the Opposite Parties No.1 & 3 are found deficient in giving proper service to the complainant. Hence, the present complaint of the Complainant deserves to succeed against the Opposite Parties No.1 & 3, and the same is partly allowed, qua them. The Opposite Parties No.1 & 3 are directed to:-

[a]    To pay Rs.21,262.50/- (after deducting 50% of the invoice price towards depreciation) to the Complainant;

[b]    To pay Rs.7,500/-on account of deficiency in service and causing mental and physical harassment to the Complainant; 

[c]    To pay Rs.7,500/- as cost of litigation;    

                The complaint against Opposite Party No.2 fails and is accordingly dismissed with no order as to costs. 

10.         The above said order shall be complied within 30 days of its receipt by the Opposite Parties No.1 & 3; thereafter, they shall be liable for an interest @12% per annum on the amounts mentioned in sub-para [a] & [b] above, apart from cost of litigation as mentioned in sub-para [c] above, from the date of institution of this complaint, till it is paid. 
11.         The Complainant shall return the Laptop in question to the Opposite Parties No.1 & 3 after the compliance of the order.
12.         Certified copy of this order be communicated to the parties, free of charge. After compliance file be consigned to record room.

	Sd/-	Sd/-	Sd/-
20/07/2018	[Suresh Kumar Sardana]	[Surjeet Kaur]	[Rattan Singh Thakur]
	Member	Member	President