OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ANGUL
PRESENT:- SRI DURGA CHARAN MISHRA.
PRESIDENT
A N D
Mrs. S.MALLICK & Sri K.K.Mohanty,
MEMBER .
Consumer Complaint No. 72 of 2012
Date of Filling : - 23.07.2012.
Date of Order :- 20.10.2016.
Sudhakar Nayak,S/O/Late Purna Ch.Nayak,
Resident At- Qr.No.F/69P,T.T.P.S(N.T.P.C),
Sec-1,Thermal Power Atation,Talcher,
P.O/P.S/S.D-Talcher,Dist.Angul.
_________________________Complainant.
Vrs.
01.M/S.GMS IT MAII,N.H 42,Hanuman
Bazar,Angul Town,P.O/P.S/,Dist.Angul.
02.Serivce Incharge,Remington(I) Ltd.,
Authorised Service Centre,Plot No.100,Saheed Nagar,
Bhubaneswar,Dist.Khurda.
03.Corporate Office,H.P India Sales,Hewlett Packard,
India Sales Pvt.Ltd,Park MG road,Gurg Gon,Tower-D,6th Floor.
_________________________ Opp. parties.
For the complainant :- Sri Md.Azad & associates(Advs.)
For the opp.party No.1 :- Sri P.K.Majhi & associates(Advs.)
For the opp.party No.2 :- None.
For the opp.party No.3 :- Sri S.K.Mohanty & associates(Advs.)
: J U D G E M E N T :
Mrs.S.Mallick,Member.
The complainant has filed this case with prayer to direct the opp.parties to replace the defective Lap-top with new one which he has purchased from them along with compensation for deficiency of service and cost of litigation .
2. The short case of the complainant is that he purchased a H.P laptop by paying Rs. 37,000.00 through invoice No. 3884 on dt. 14.02.2011 from opp.party No.1 . After few months of purchase he found that the laptop did not function properly . So he lodged complaint before the opp.parties on dt. 15.10.2011 and the engineer of opp.parties came to his residence and rectified the defect by replacing some parts of the said laptop. But again the laptop was found to be defective. When it was brought to opp.parties’ notice, they always tried to avoid the time/period of warranty of one year. Again on dt. 23.02.2012 the engineer replaced the hard disc. After one month of replacement again a major defect was found with the laptop for which complainant had to pay Rs. 11,000/- for replacement of the motherboard as the warranty period was over. At last on dt. 15.07.2012 the complainant requested the opp.parties to replace it with new one when it was again found to be defective .The complainant is suffering a lot and it has caused mental agony and harassment. Therefore, he came to this forum, seeking the relifs as stated above in para No.1.
3. Opp.parties No.1 & 2 have remained ex-party in this case. Opp.party No.3 has contested the case by filing written version denying all the allegation levelled against him by the complainant with a prayer to reject the case along with written argument which is not clearly visible. According to him the complainant has failed and neglected to follow the guidelines/procedure given in the user manual as recommended for smooth and better performance of the laptop in question. He further stated that the warranty benefit provided by the opp.party No.3 on the said laptop is for a definite period. It does not provide any service/remedy available under the warranty free of cost, if any complaint is received after the expiry of the stipulated period. Even if the fault occurs before the expiry period of warranty, the opp.party is not liable to provide any service to the customer, free of cost, if the customer communicate such fault to the opp.party after the expiry of warranty period. The complaint in the Hard drive of the laptop was reported after the expiry of warranty. So the complainant was advised to get the hard drive of laptop replaced on chargeable basis. He further stated that the complainant is not entitled for replacement of the laptop , which is against the policy and not permissible .
4. In view of the above pleadings of the parties, the following issues arise for consideration:-
Issues:-
- Whether there is consumer and seller /manufacturer relationship exists between the complainant and the opp. Parties ?
- Whether after repeated approaches the opp. Parties did not take any step to rectify the defect and thereby caused deficiency in service in violation of their promise ?
- Whether the opp.parties have did any unfair trade practice ?
- To what relief the complainant is entitled to get from opp. parties ?
: F I N D I N G S :
Issue No.(i):-Admittedly the complainant had purchased one HP Laptop from OP No-1 ( GMG IT MAIL) by paying cash of Rs. 37,000/- only vide invoice No.-3884 dt. 14.02.2011 which is Annexure-I in this case opp.party No.2 is the service incharge of opp.party No.3 and opp.party No.3 is the manufacturer company of the said Laptop. So there is consumer & seller/manufacturer/service provider relationship between them.
Issue No.(ii)& (iii):- Purchase of laptop by the complainant as mentioned above , remains undisputed being an admitted fact . So the only question remains for consideration whether the opp.parties by adopting unfair trade practice sold the defective laptop to the complainant and made deficiency in service when reported for rectification. On going through the case records and the documents (Annexure II- a & b) filed therewith we found that whenever any complaint was received from complainant , the opp.parties immediately rectified the defects. According to the opp.party No.3, the mother board was replaced for Rs. 11,000.00 only as the defect occurred after the warranty period. Thus, the opp.parties have never neglected in extending due service for rectification of defects of laptop in question. Admittedly the warranty period was one year from the date of purchase. The laptop was purchased on 14.02.2011 for which the warranty period extends upto dt. 13.02.2012.
From the complaint petition it is found that the service provider i.e opp.party No.2 has attended number of times and rectified the defects of the said laptop. So, it cannot be at all said that there was deficiency in providing service, rather it can be said that the service rendered is sufficient. Since the petitioner has used the laptop without any problem for some time and thereafter for a very long period till expiry of warranty getting the service of opp.parties, it cannot be definitely said that the opp.parties had sold a defective laptop to the complainant. Hence the opp.party No.2 cannot be held liable for not rendering service. The allegation in the complainant petition being the assertion of the complainant, the onus lies on him to prove such fact through satisfactory evidence and materials. Nothing is also available on record to show that the defect in the said laptop was tested by the appropriate laboratory or any other relevant scores as per law .
Opp.party No.3 has filed a number of decisions of Hon’ble Supreme Court, Hon’ble National Commission and Hon’ble State Commissions where as complainant has not relied on any decision .Perused all the decisions and found that those are in favour of the opp.parties. Hence Opp. Party No.1 & 3 can not be held liable for selling or manufacturing a defective laptop.
However the complainant has filed the mother board replacement receipt (Annexure-III) in which in the back side, the opp.party No.1 has received the lap top on dt.15.07.2012.So the opp.party No.1 should return the laptop to the complainant after repairing it.
Issue No.(iv):- In view of the forgoing discussion we come to the conclusion that the complainant is not entitled to get any relief except getting back the laptop from opp.party No.1 in full working condition.
5. Hence ordered:-
: O R D E R :
The case is dismissed on contest against opp.party No.3 and exparte against opp.party No.1 & 2 but in the circumstances without any costs. Opp.party No.1 is directed to repair the laptop of complainant fully and return it to him within 45(forty-five) days of getting this order and the complainant shall receive it. It is made clear that if any part is to be replaced during repairing, then the complainant shall bear the cost of the part or he will take back the laptop in its present condition without repairing.
Order delivered in the open forum
today the 20th October,2016 with hand and seal of this Forum.
Typed to my dictation
and corrected by me Sd/- (Sri D.C.Mishra)
Sd/- President.
(Mrs. S. Mallick)
Member. Sd/-
(Sri K.K.Mohanty),
Member.
