BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ERNAKULAM.
Date of filing : 11/10/2011
Date of Order : 31/05/2012
Present :-
Shri. A. Rajesh, President.
Shri. Paul Gomez, Member.
Smt. C.K. Lekhamma, Member.
C.C. No. 548/2011
Between
Jayesh. K.G., | :: | Complainant |
Karuthedath (H), Pindimana. P.O., Kothamangalam. |
| (By Adv. Tom Joseph, Court Road, Muvattupuzha – 686 661) |
And
1. M/s. MSI Computer (India) Pvt. Ltd., | :: | Opposite Parties |
1st Floor, Okhla Industrial Area, Phase – 1, New Delhi – 110 020. 2. Digicare, M/s. Smart Link Network Systems Ltd., 37/2038 A 48 & 2038 A5, Mangalath Building, Lane Nr. SBI, Subash Chandra Bose Road, Kadavanthra, Cochin – 682 020. 3. M/s. Pittappillil Cyber World, Basil Junction, Kothamangalam – 686 691. |
| (Op.pts absent) |
O R D E R
A. Rajesh, President.
1. The undisputed facts of the complainant's case are as follows :
The complainant purchased a laptop from the 3rd opposite party on 15-07-2010 for Rs. 20,000/-. Two years warranty has been provided by the 1st opposite party. Within 6 months from the date of purchase, the key board became defunct. The 2nd opposite party replaced the same. After some months, the hard disk became non-functioning. Thereafter, the entire system became defunct. The 2nd opposite party tried to repair the same, but the defect still persists. The recurring defects of the laptop are due to its manufacturing defect. The complainant is entitled to get refund of the price of the gadget together with Rs. 5,000/- towards compensation and costs of the proceedings. This complaint hence.
2. In spite of service of notice from this Forum, the opposite parties have decided not to contest the matter for reasons their own. Proof affidavit has been filed by the complainant. Ext. A1 and A2 were marked on the side of the complainant. Heard the counsel for the complainant.
3. The points that came up for consideration are :-
Whether the complainant is entitled to get refund the price of the laptop?
Whether the opposite parties are liable to pay compensation and costs of the proceedings to the complainant?
4. Point Nos. i. and ii. :- Ext. A1 retail invoice goes to show that the complainant purchased a laptop from the 3rd opposite party on 15-07-2010 at a price of Rs. 20,000/-. According to the complainant, time and again the 2nd opposite party repaired the defects of the computer, but they failed to rectify the same. It is stated that the recurring defect of the computer is due to its inherent manufacturing defect. Nothing is on record to controvert the averments of the complainant conspicuously for the absence of the opposite parties, which admittedly amounts to their concurrence of the complaint. Therefore, we are of the firm view that the complainant is entitled to get refund of the price of the gadget with interest especially since the gadget is well within the warranty period and the opposite party has failed to respond. We rely on the decision of the Hon'ble National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in Sony Ericsson India Ltd. Vs. Ashish Aggarwal (IV (2007) CPJ 294 (NC) ), in which the Hon'ble Commission held that a frustrated consumer is entitled to get refund of the price of the gadget.
5. Point No. ii. :- We do not allow compensation or costs, since the opposite party is ordered to refund the price of the laptop fully with interest.
6. In the result, we partly allow the complaint and direct that the opposite parties shall jointly and severally refund the price of the machine as per Ext. A1 to the complainant together with 12% p.a. from the date of complaint till realisation.
The order shall be complied with, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
Pronounced in open Forum on this the 31st day of May 2012
Forwarded/By Order, Sd/- A. Rajesh, President.
Sd/- Paul Gomez, Member.
Sd/- C.K. Lekhamma, Member.
Senior Superintendent.
A P P E N D I X
Complainant's Exhibits :-
Exhibit A1 | :: | Copy of retail invoice dt. 15-07-2010 |
“ A2 | :: | Copy of customer delivery chalan |
Opposite party's Exhibits :: Nil
=========
