DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

PATIALA.

                                      Consumer Complaint No.84 of 16.7.2020

                                      Decided on: 6.11.2024

Manish Dutt aged 27 years old, son of Sh.Btaham Dutt, R/o 302-D, Street No.24, Azad Nagar, Near Sirhind Road, Patiala Aadhar card No.4093 9704 9249.

                                                                   …………...Complainant

                                      Versus

1. M/s Micromax Informatics Ltd.288-A, Udyog Vihar Phase-4, Gurugram Haryana-122015 through its MD/GM/CEO.
2. M/s Mobile Tech, B-1, Ranjit Plaza, Hotel Ranjit Plaza Bhupindra Road, Patiala-147001 through its Manager/Authorized Signatory.

                                                                   …………Opposite Parties

Complaint under the Consumer Protection Act

QUORUM

                                      Sh.Pushvinder Singh, President

                                      Sh.G.S.Nagi, Member   

ARGUED BY

                                      Sh.Sandeep Kumar, counsel for complainant.

                                      OPs exparte.

 ORDER

                                      PUSHVINDER SINGH, PRESIDENT

1. The instant complaint is filed by Manish Dutt (hereinafter referred to as the complainant) against M/s Micromax Informatics Ltd. and another (hereinafter referred to as the OP/s) under the Consumer Protection Act ( for short the Act).
2. It is averred in the complaint that complainant purchased a new laptop make Micromax Canvas Laptab-2 (wifi) model LT777W on 17.10.2017 from Flipkart and same was delivered to him at his address.
3. It is averred that on 28.8.2019 touch panel of the laptop stopped working. Complainant approached authorized service centre of Micromax i.e. OP No.2 for repairing of laptop and dealing Manager of OP No.2 told that touch panel will be replaced, the cost of which would be Rs.2850/-. No other problem was found in the laptop and the same was found in proper working condition. That complainant paid Rs.1500/- in advance and service invoice dated 28.8.2019 to this effect was issued by the OP No.2. That manager of OP No.2 told that seven days will be taken for replacing touch panel  and after that complainant could collect the laptop. It is averred that from 5.9.2019 complainant regularly visited OP No.2 to get back his laptop but on 30.11.2019 the employee of service centre openly claimed that the laptop got damaged by their mechanic and refused to return the laptop to the complainant. That complainant sent legal notice to the OPs on 2.12.2019 but the OPs failed to reply the same. That again on 3.3.2020 complainant visited OP No.2 and came to know that they also lost memory card. That again on 12.3.2020 complainant sent legal notice to OPs No.1&2 but again the OPs failed to give any reply to the legal notice and the laptop is lying with OP No.2.
4. That on 22.6.2020 complainant tried to contact OP No.1 through mail and on 23.6.2020 OP No.1 provided ticket id (107124) with the assurance that they will contact the complainant but no one contacted the complainant. There is thus deficiency in service on the part of the OPs which caused  mental agony and harassment to the complainant. Hence this complaint with the prayer to accept the same by giving directions to the OPs to replace the above said laptop of the complainant or to return the amount of Rs.16000/- alongwith interest @ 12% per annum till realization and also to pay Rs.10,000/-as compensation.
5. Notice of the complaint was duly issued to the OPs. Notice issued to OP No.1 through registered post neither  received back unserved  nor OP No.1 appeared to contest the complaint and was proceeded against exparte. OP No.2 also failed to appear despite service and was proceeded against ex-parte.
6. In exparte evidence, ld. counsel for the complainant has tendered in evidence Ex.CW1/A affidavit of the complainant alongwith documents i.e. Ex.C1 copy of laptop bill dated 17.10.2017, Ex.C2 copy of job card dated 28.8.2019, Ex.C3 copy of legal notice dated 2.12.2019, Ex.C4 copy and Ex.C5 postal receipts dated 2.12.2019,Ex.C6 copy of legal notice dated 12.3.2020, Ex.C7 and Ex.C8 postal receipts dated 12.3.2020,Ex.C9 copy of mail communication dated 23.6.2020 and closed evidence.
7. We have heard the ld. counsel for the complainant and have also gone through the record of the case, carefully.
8. The complainant had purchased a Micromax canvas Laptab-2 through online portal from Flipkart on 17.10.2017 as per invoice,Ex.C1 for a consideration of Rs.11,999/-.The said laptab was covered under warranty for a period of one year as per the said tax invoice.
9. As per the complainant the said laptab stopped working on 28.8.2019.The complainant then approached the authorized service centre of Micromax i.e. the manufacturer of the laptab for the repair of the said laptab and the same was handed over at authorized service centre vide invoice No.1224 dated 28.8.2019 as per Ex.C2. As per the said invoice the warranty of the laptab was void and it was remarked that the touch of the laptab is physically damaged and a demand of Rs.2850/- was made for the repair of the said laptab against which an advance of Rs.1500/-was paid by the complainant and the balance of Rs.1350/- was to be paid after the repair of the laptab. It was conveyed to the complainant that the repair will take around seven days after which the complainant can collect the laptab from the service centre.
10. The complainant approached the service centre repeatedly and on 30.11.2019 it was verbally conveyed to the complainant that the laptab had got damaged by their mechanic during  repairs and refused to return the labtab to the complainant. A legal notice was then served by the complainant on 2.12.2019 as per Ex.C3 to both OPs No.1 & OP No.2 but no positive outcome came out of the same. The complainant then approached the OP for the return of the memory card of the labtab. However, it was conveyed that the memory card has also been lost. Another legal notice was then served by the complainant on 12.3.2020 but even then no action was taken by the OPs. The matter was then taken up by the complainant through e-mail dated 2.7.2020 with OP No.1 i.e. the manufacturer of the product who in response to the said email stated that the concerned team will get in touch with the complainant immediately. However, no further message or communication was received by the complainant from either OP No.1 or OP No.2.Even after the best efforts of the complainant neither the laptab was repaired nor the damaged laptab or its memory card was returned to the complainant which is an unfair trade practice leading to mental agony and harassment to the complainant.
11. We are of the opinion that the OPs were deficient in providing the services to the complainant despite receipt of consideration amount paid by the complainant which is proved by service invoice. It is also a fact that the laptab was used by the complainant for a period of almost two years as such we direct the OPs jointly and severally to refund the 75% of the cost of the laptab i.e. Rs.8999/- plus Rs.1500/- paid by the complainant for the repair of the laptab alongwith simple interest @8% per annum from the date of respective payments i.e.17.10.2017 and 28.08.2019 till realization. The OPs are also directed to pay composite compensation of Rs.5000/- to the complainant. Compliance of the order be made by the OPs within 45 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.
12. Certified copies of this order be sent to the parties under the rules.   
13. The instant complaint could not be disposed of within stipulated period due to heavy rush of work and for want of Quorum from long time.
85109252238716.  
85109252238717.  

                                              G.S.Nagi                           PUSHVINDER SINGH

                                              Member                          President