Tamil Nadu

North Chennai

CC/38/2020

S.Amudhavendhan,S/o.Sankarapandian - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s.Madura Computers,Rep by its Proprietor - Opp.Party(s)

M/s.S.Mahendran

24 Apr 2023

ORDER

 Complaint presented on :10.02.2020

 Date of disposal            :24.04.2023

                                                                                  

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

CHENNAI (NORTH)

@ 2^ND Floor, T.N.P.S.C. Road, V.O.C. Nagar, Park Town, Chennai – 600 003.

 

                PRESENT : THIRU. G. VINOBHA, M.A., B.L.,                          :PRESIDENT

                                      TMT. KAVITHA KANNAN, M.E.,                         : MEMBER-I

                                      THIRU.V.RAMAMURTHY,B.A.,B.L.,PGDLA., :MEMBER-II

 

C.C. No.38/2020

 

DATED MONDAY THE 24^th  DAY OF APRIL 2023

 

S.Amudhavendhan,

Aged 61 years Senior Citizen,

No.1274, Golden Colony,

Anna Nagar West Extension,

Padi, Chennai-600 050.   

                                                             …..Complainant

 ..Vs..

M/s. Madura Computers,

Rep.by its Proprietor, Kannan,

No.5, 1^st Floor, Sivamurthi Complex,

M.T.H.Road,

Padi, Chennai-600 0050.                                                                 …..Opposite Party

 

Counsel for Complainant                          : M/s. S.Mahendran,

Counsel for opposite party                          : Ex-parte.

 

 

ORDER

 BY PRESENT : THIRU. G. VINOBHA, M.A., B.L.,  :PRESIDENT

This complaint has been filed by the complainant against the opposite party under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 prays to direct the opposite party to return the laptop with new and good quality hard disc & battery and to pay a sum of Rs.300000/- towards mental agony and loss and to pay a sum of Rs.20000/- towards costs.

1.THE COMPLAINT IN BRIEF:

          The Complainant submitted that the Complainant's personal use LapTop got repaired, hence the Complainant approached the Opposite Party for rectification of above Lap Top on 21.03.2019. The Opposite Party's proprietor checked the above LapTop and told to the Complainant that the Battery's power was exhausted and Hard Disk was also got repaired and further in order to rectify the Battery and replacement of new Hard Disc the Opposite Party demanded a sum of Rs.3200/- and further the Opposite Party's proprietor assured to the Complainant that he would give a proper Receipt with warranty card for one year, believing the Opposite Party's words the Complainant also paid a sum of Rs.3200/- and handed over the above LapTop to the Opposite Party on 21.03.2019 for the above rectification of Battery and replacement of new Hard Disk. However the Opposite Party failed to issue the above said receipt and warranty card but the Opposite Party issued only a fake receipt without GST and the Complainant questioned the same, in turn the Opposite Party's proprietor replied that the above fake receipt is the regular and proper receipt that is being issued to all the customers including the Complainant and further told that the Opposite Party's company is responsible for all the defects and repairs within one year. After the rectification of Battery and replacement of Hard Disc the Opposite Party handed over the above LapTop to the Complainant. The Complainant started to use the above LapTop but it was again not working properly. The Complainant submits that due to Complainant's LapTop was again got repaired within the six months (warranty one year period), therefore the Complainant visited the Opposite Party for the rectification for one more time on 16.10.2019. On testing the above LapTop the Opposite Party's proprietor reported to the Complainant that the Hard Disk in the LapTop was got repaired and needs replacement of new Hard Disk and further reported that the recovery of data to be done since all the data (320 GB Capacity) in the Hard Disk were destroyed hence the Complainant has to pay further sum of Rs.1950/- but the Complainant showed the above receipt and warranty card. However the Opposite Party insisted the above further payment, at that time the Opposite Party asked the Complainant to hand over the Hard Disk, the Complainant removed the same and utterly shocked to learn that the above replaced Hard Disk is very old one and manufactured in the year of 2009 but the Complainant purchased his LapTop only in the year of 2010. The Complainant again handed over the above LapTop to the Opposite Party with instruction to rectify the same but Opposite Party had not rectified the same but still insisted the above further payment despite the warranty was in force. Therefore the Opposite Party deliberately cheated the Complainant by using old, fake Hard Disk and fake receipt and fake warranty card. Therefore the Complainant lodged a police complaint dt.15.10.2019 against the Opposite Party at Korattur Police Station and on enquiry the police authorities advised the Opposite Party to replace the above hard disc and settle the issue immediately but the Opposite Party never heeded the advice of the police authorities. The police authorities also registered CSR Vide No. 1182/2019 dt. 15.10.2019 against the Opposite Party's Proprietor Kannan.  Further submitted that due to the opposite party’s unfair trade practice and deficiency of service the complainant unable to use his laptop and further the complainant’s wife is self employed woman, complainant was using the laptop for his wife’s business for several year and the complainant’s wife unable to continue the business. Therefore the opposite party pay is liable to pay the compensation to the complainant. Hence this complaint.

2. POINTS FOR CONSIDERATION:

1. Whether there is any deficiency in service practice or unfair trade practice on the part opposite party as alleged in the complaint?

 

2. Whether the complainant is entitled for the reliefs prayed in the

    complaint.  If, so to what extent?

 

The complainant filed proof affidavit and documents Ex.A1 to A4 are marked on their side and written arguments.  The opposite party was set exparte.

3. POINT NO :1 :-

          It is alleged by the complainant that a laptop which was purchased in the year 2010 for personal use for the complainant got repaired for which he approached the opposite party for rectification on 21.03.2019 and after checking the laptop the opposite party proprietor told that the battery power was exhausted and hard disk got repaired and both has to be replaced and demanded Rs.3200/- and assured that he will give proper receipt and warranty card for one year and believing his words the complainant paid the amount and handedover the laptop on 21.03.2019 to the opposite party but however the opposite party has failed to issue the original bill and warranty card but issued a fake receipt without GST number and when the complainant questioned the same opposite party replied that only such kind of receipt is being issued to all the customer but assured that all the defects and repairs were covered under the warranty for one year and after such rectification of battery and replacement of hard disk and the opposite party handedover the laptop to the complainant but it again not worked properly and hence on 16.10.2019 he went to the opposite party with laptop and on checking the opposite party required further sum of Rs.1950/- by stating that all data in the hard disk were destroyed and the data has to be recovered and new hard disk has to be replaced and when the complainant removed the hardisk he found that the disk was manufactured in the year 2009 but the laptop was bought in 2010 therefore the complainant contended that the opposite party deliberately cheated the complainant by using old hard disk and by giving fake receipt without issuing proper warranty card and hence he gave a police complainat at korattur police station and a CSR was issued in CSR.NO.1182/19 dated 15.10.2019 against the opposite party but the opposite party still insisted and demanded Rs.1950/- for rectification of laptop and hence the complainant alleged that the opposite party committed unfair trade practice and deficiency in service by issuing fake receipt without GST number and also by fixing a old hard disk and hence prayed to return the laptop new hard disk and battery and also prayed compensation.

          4.  The opposite party remained exparte. Ex.A1 is the receipt issued by opposite party dated 21.03.2019 wherein it is found that Rs.3200/- was received towards battery and hard disk and one year warranty service is mentioned, but the details of the laptop with its number and company is not found in Ex.A1.  Ex.A2 is the copy of the police complaint given to Korattur Police station against the opposite party by alleging that the opposite party has given a fake receipt without giving warranty card and also cheated the complainant by fixing a old hard disk.  Ex.A3 is CSR receipt dated 15.10.2019 issued by korattur police and Ex.A4 is the legal notice issued  by the complainant. 

          5.  On perusal of averment and documents filed by the complainant though it is stated that the laptop was purchased in the year 2010, there is no document to prove that in whose name it was purchased and the  name of the brand and serial number of laptop alleged to have been purchased by the complainant.  At one place the complainant says it is used for his personal use but in para.5 of the complaint it is stated that it was used by his wife in  her business which is carried on in the name of M/s. Varsh Equipments.  Though it is alleged in the complaint that the opposite party in March 2019 has replaced a old hard disk manufactured in the year 2009 and thereby cheated the complainant there is no proof for the same.  Though it is alleged by the complainant that he has handedover the laptop to the opposite party for rectification on 16.10.2019 there is no proof for the same.  Further there is no proof to show that the opposite party demanded Rs.1950/- as further payment to rectify the laptop.  The complainant without filing the necessary documentary proof to prove his ownership and handing over of laptop to opposite party is not entitle to allege unfair trade practice and deficiency in service merely based upon Ex.A1 receipt issued by the opposite party. The complainant failed to prove the alleged deficiency in service and unfair trade practice against the opposite party as alleged in the complaint. Point no.1 is answered accordingly.

6. POINT NO :2 :-

          Based on finding given to Point No.1 the complainant failed to prove the deficiency of service or unfair trade practice on the part of opposite party and hence the complainant is not entitled for return of laptop with new hard disk and batter and compensation as claimed in the complaint. Point No.2 is answered accordingly.

               In the result the Complaint is dismissed. No costs.

Dictated by the President to the Steno-Typist taken down, transcribed and computerized by him, corrected by the President and pronounced by us in the open Commission on this the 24^th day of  April 2023.

MEMBER – I               MEMBER – II                                   PRESIDENT

LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE COMPLAINANT:

Ex.A1	21.03.2019	Receipt issued by the opposite party.
Ex.A2		Police complaint by complainant.
Ex.A3	15.10.2019	CSR receipt issued by Korattur Police Station.
Ex.A4	10.01.2020	Legal notice of complainant.

 

       

MEMBER  I               MEMBER  II                                   PRESIDENT