BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION AT BANGALORE (URBAN)

DATED 26^th DAY OF JULY 2023

ORDER

SMT. SUMA ANILKUMAR, MEMBER

Complainant has filed this complaint U/S 35 of Consumer Protection Act 2019 against OP for the following relief:-

A. Direct the OP No.1 to replace the Laptop by providing a new Laptop with same configuration along with compensation for damages, or direct OP not to refund Rs.63,034.47/- along with interest.

B. Direct the OP’s to pay an amount of RS.1,00,000/- for the inconvenience and mental agony caused to the complainant.

C. Direct the OP’s to pay Rs.50,000/- as cost of legal expenditure incurred in prosecuting this complaint.

D. Granting such other relief as the Hon’ble Commission may deem fit and necessary in the circumstance of the case

2. Brief facts of this case are as follows:-

Complainant in order to meet her professional requirements intended to purchase a Laptop. She also submits that she left her earlier job in order to upgrade herself and to spend more time in practicing the new technologies which are professional in the present market. The complainant had selected the model 81N6006GIN – IDEAPAD C34035.5cm – Platinum serial number MP1SYCPK and ordered the same on 16.11.2022 along with 3 years additional accidental damage warranty, by paying total amount of Rs.63,034.47/- by investing all her left out savings to get the best result in the practice. She received the Laptop from the OP No.2 on 18.11.2020 along with the tax invoice number LWS2020/21 – 16277. After taking the delivery of Laptop, the complainant started to operate with the hope to get best results while practicing in the lap to improve her carrier but she faced multiple issues in the premium Laptop such as:-

1. System Performance Issue
2. Touch screen issue
3. 3.5 Jack issue
4. USB port issue
5. Internet connectivity issue
6. Screen issue
7. Issue with sync between keyboard and display
8. System freeze/Lag etc.

3.Under this circumstances the complainant immediately tried to contact the OP through their calls and E-mails but no response from them. Following are the few tickets/incidents:-

a) 8015986144

b) 8016120941

c) 8016171941

Incidents:

a) 210222- - 005675

b) 2001746944

c) 210304 – 009476

d) 210304 - 009479

4. The complainant contacted OP No.2 multiple times hoping for solutions and was always advised to perform multiple checks and multiple BIOS updates and even complete OS re-installation but never provided solutions. She also submits that OP disconnected the calls intentionally without providing any support related to issues.

5. During the lockdown sufferings and due to critical pandemic situation, the OP had asked the complainant to allow their service engineer to have look and fix the issues and the OP engineer had fixed issues multiple times wherein they replaced SSD, RAM and even mother board, which means new machine was almost dissected, and the engineer also did multiple OS installations.

6. The complainant submits that even after replacing and fixing all the issues the OP could not give any concrete solutions to the problems and later started avoiding calls. The product served to the complainant is no doubt having inherent manufacturing defect which cannot be rectified. She submits that her moto to purchase the high end premium Laptop was to do lab related practice in her professional work, but she could not make herself ready for the job requirement due to the default and had to be jobless for more than 7 months. Left with no other option the complainant sent legal notice through E-mail dated 14.05.2021 calling upon the OP’s to refund the cost of the Laptop along with damages for the inconvenience caused to complainant due to OP within 15 days from the receipt of the said notice. Hence this complaint of the complainant to refund the amount of Rs.63,034.47/- with compensation for the mental agony filed by the complainant.

7. On the issue of notice to OP, the OP appears and files his version. The OP No.2 remains absent and hence placed Ex-parte.

8. In the version of OP No.1 (Miss. Anita Kapoor, working as General counsel director legally at Lenovo, India Private Limited, M/s Lenovo India Private Limited, representative of its registered office at Ferns Icon Level 2, Bangalore), the OP No.1 submits that the averments and contentions raised against her is false and baseless and has duly honored the warranty chain, repair and carried out the necessary rectification as and when the complainant approached the service centre. Technical team of the authorized service centre of OP No.1 provided necessary rectification and necessary guidance in formatting the system of the complaint. After running the Lenovo service centre tests on the system of the complainant, the service personal found no problem in the hardware of the Laptop. There is no deficiency of service or Unfair Trade Practice in the part of the OP No.1 as alleged by the complainant. Hence OP submits that the complainant is misconceived, not maintainable, unattainable and is liable to be dismissed.

9. OP No.1 in order to prove his contention has filed affidavit evidence along with document as Ex.R.1 to Ex.R.3 and also filed written argument. Complainant counsel filed IA/S151CPC to recall the stage for evidence of the complainant, OP counsel filed objection to IA. Order on IA dated 16.11.2023 allows the complainant to lead her evidence and on recall of the IA on 24.04.2023, the complainant has filed expert reports on laptop and has filed 4 documents at the time of complaint. Total document of 1 to 5 are filed by complainant.

10. Both the parties have submitted written argument and heard argument of both the parties.

11.  On the basis of above pleadings for our consideration are as follows:-

i) Whether the complainant proves the deficiency of service on the part of OPs?

ii) Whether complainant is entitled for the relief?

iii) What order?

12.  Our answers to the above points are as follows:-

Point No.1:- Affirmative.

Point No.2:- Partly affirmative.

Point No.3:- As per the final order.                 

                    REASONS

13. Point No.1&2:-These two points are interrelated and hence they are taken up for common discussion.

 14. It is clear by the Document No.1 produced by the complainant i.e, the copy of the invoice that the complainant has purchased the Lenovo Laptop on 16.11.2020 with delivery on 18.11.2020 at the cost of Rs.63,034.47/- along with 2 years of additional warranty. The said Laptop has multiple issues with it, within the month from the date of purchase, which hindered the complainant’s career. The warranty period is up to 17.11.2023 and the extended warranty of 2 years that it total warranty period of 3 years is on the said purchased Laptop. The extended warranty is taken by the complainant by paying extra amount. The claim for the repair or refund or replace falls within the warranty period. The expert report dated 26.05.2023 submitted by the complainants shows that Laptop performance is not up to the mark. Even after continuous follow up by the complainant, the OP fails to rectify or refund or replace the product for the complainant, which amounts to deficiency of service and unfair trade practice. Therefore the OP is liable to refund the amount of Rs.63,034.47/- along with compensation of Rs.20,000/- for the inconvenience and mental agony caused to the complainant with Rs.5,000/- towards the legal charges.

15. Point No.3:- In view of the above discussion referred, we proceed to pass the following order:-

ORDER

i) The complaint is allowed in part.

ii) Both the OP’s are directed to refund the amount of Rs.63,034.47/- to the complainant.

iii) Both the OP is further directed to pay compensation of Rs.20,000/- for mental agony and harassment and Rs.5,000/- towards the litigation expenses.

iv) The OPs shall comply order within 30 days, failing which the OP shall pay interest of 9% per annum on the amount of Rs.63,034.47/- from the date of order till realization.

v) Furnish the copy of the order to both the parties without costs.

(Dictated to the Stenographer, got it transcribed and corrected, pronounced in the Open Commission on this 26^th day of JULY, 2023)

Documents produced by the Complainant-P.W.1 are as follows:

Documents produced by the representative of opposite party – R.W.1;