Tamil Nadu

North Chennai

CC/74/2021

Mr.Mohamed Javeed, - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s.SYSNET Glopal Technologies Private Limited - Opp.Party(s)

Party in Parson

12 Apr 2023

ORDER

                                                                 Complaint presented on :17.03.2021                                                                         

                                                                Date of disposal             :12.04.2023

                                                                                  

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.74/2021

 

DATED WEDNESDAY THE 12^th DAY OF APRIL 2023

Mohamed Javeed,

99, Bharathiyar Extn Street,

Vivekananda Nagar,

Kodungaiyur,

Chennai-600 118.                                                                …..Complainant

 

 ..Vs..

1. The Manager,

M/s. SYSNET GLOBAL TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED,

AUTHORISED SERVICE CENTER OF “MSI LAPTOP”

No.9, 2^nd Floor, Arathi Building,

New Tank Street,

Valluvarkottam,

Nungambakkam, Chennai-600 034.

 

2. Appario Retail Private Limited,

Rep.by its Manager,

No.1/B, Indospace Logistics Park,

Puduvoyal, Durainallur Village, Ponneri Taluk,

Tiruvalluvar, Tamilnadu-601 206.    

(Amended as per C.M.P.104/2022 order dated 26.12.2022)                                                                                                                       …..Opposite Parties

 

Counsel for Complainant                          : Party-In-Person

Counsel for 1^st & 2^nd opposite party            : Exparte.

 

ORDER

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

This complaint has been filed by the complainant against the opposite parties under section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 prays to direct the opposite parties to refund from the entire amount from the opposite party for a sum of Rs.74000/- with 18% interest from the date of purchase and date of disposal of the complaint and to pay compensation of Rs.150000/- for mental agony and hardship from the opposite party and to pay a sum of Rs.150000/- for issue the manufacturing defective laptop given by the opposite party to the complainant and to pay Rs.50000/- as costs.

1.THE COMPLAINT IN BRIEF:

          The complainant submit that the complainant purchased the NEW LAPTOP (MSI, GAMING CORE i7 8^TH GEN 15.6 inch GAMING FHD THIN AND LIGHT LAPTOP (8GB/1TB HDD/WINDOWS 10/4GB GRAPHICS/BLACK/1.86kg), GF63 8RC239IN/B-7GDRVDM8(HSN 841), Invoice no.MAA46711295 dated 30.10.2018 through ‘AMAZON’ online shopping via an e-commerce through online booking on 25.10.2018 and delivered on 26.10.2018 with warranty for 2 years and 3 months. The laptop original price was Rs.89990/- after discount and cash back the complainant paid the sum of Rs.74089/- by way of complainant’s father debit card on 25.10.2018.  The complainant stated that the complainant to the shock and surprise the delivered new laptop does not working due to ‘KEYBOARD IS NOT WORKING’ and immediately to Amazon and taken the replaced the laptop on 29.10.2018 and replaced the laptop on 30.10.2018. The complainant stated that the complainant has upgraded ‘SOLID STATE DRIVE (SSD) UPGRADE’ for the complainant’s sister education purpose for the ‘SSD UPGRADE’ his laptop with the MSI authorized service center located at Egmore and handed over to the laptop on 03.11.2018 and paid for a sum of Rs.354/- for his laptop ‘SOLID STATE DRIVE (SSD) UPGRADE”. The complainant stated that after a one year the complainant approached due to slow performance, hanging, heating sometimes keyboard and mouse does not working the opposite party at Egmore service center, but the opposite party had been shifted the service center from Egmore to Adyar.  The complainant approached the Adyar service center on 16.09.2019, checked the laptop thoroughly and replied the laptop is alright after examining for 2 days with the adyar service center. The complainant had taken the laptop on 21.09.2019 from the adyar service center. The complainant submits that he approached the opposite parties with an issue of hinge panel misalignment which was examined and replaced with a new hinge panel and the same laptop was handed to the complainant in a week’s time along with a factory seal in the bottom of laptop. The complainant is again said to  have visited the opposite parties service centre  for the same hinge damage which was subsequently shifted from egmore to nungambakkam on 17-11-2020 for which a memo form filled up by complainant with issues like “slow performance, touch panel shocking, web camera, hinge panel and heavy heating “ was addressed to the opposite party. The complainant submits that he was asked by the opposite party to bring the laptop charger ad the same has been followed by the complainant on the next day,18-11-2020 further the opposite party advised the complainant that the laptop needed a Operating System change and hence requested for a pendrive so as to backup data, and also stated that the web camera and hinge panel got outdated to the complainant further requested him to resend the softcopy of the invoice while the complainant alleges that he had already produced the hard copy of the invoice and what was the need for the soft copy for which the opposite party replied that the hard copy of the invoice  was lost. The complaint alleges that the  opposite party took 4 days to  change the Operating System  that the opposite party had attended the services in an improper way adding that the complainant raised a complaint about the laptop issues various months ago for which the opposite party replied that the laptop was out of warranty for which the complainant lodged a web ticket with opposite party website and thereby getting a reply from the opposite party website the complainant submitted the same to claim his warranty till end of January 2021 for which the opposite party replied that they had not received any email regarding warranty statement of the  disputed laptop for which the complainant again raised a web ticket and the complainant’s complaint is said to have been accepted and was issued an RMA number only after a week by the opposite party. Being so the complainant alleges that he was requested by the opposite party to visit the service centre as the parts for change had arrived by 09-01-2021 and was made to wait at the opposite party service centre for 2 hours out of which the complainant alleges to have suffered out of mental agony due to disappointment and hardship. The complainant contends that he was informed by one serviceman that the hinge panel was fitted with fevikwick by breaking the ventilation frame provided the camera was working. The complainant alleges that the breaking up of ventilation frame and fixing the same with fevikwick after fixing the web camera was pure deficiency of service and unfair trade practice on part of the 1st opposite party. The complainant further contends that the 2^nd opposite party had delivered a laptop with manufacture defects and also states that the opposite party manufacturer was in Taiwan and not in India and they had been selling laptops only online while the 1st opposite party was only the Authorised Service centre of the MSI. The complainant also submits that the 1st opposite party received the registered post dated 23-01-2021   but failed to respond to the same, while the registered post  dated 29-01-2020 sent to the Director of the MSI at Delhi  was returned with  “Wrong Address”. It is alleged by the complainant that he had waited for almost 7 months for a proper service, reply and replace of the disputed laptop with a new one and also said to have raised a complaint in the Hon’ble commissions about his grievancences. It is alleged on part of the complainant that he had suffered of mental agony and stress .And hence prayed to refund the total sum of Rs.74,090/- along with 18% interest from date of purchase till disposal of complaint ,to pay compensation for the mental agony and Rs.1,50,000/- for selling a laptop that had  Manufacturing Defects and Rs.50,000/- towards for miscellaneous expenses incurred and cost of the complaint.  

2. POINTS FOR CONSIDERATION:

1. Whether there is any deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part opposite parties 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 had filed proof affidavit, written arguments and documents Ex.A1 to A9 are marked on their side.  The opposite parties were set exparte.

3. POINT NO :1:-

                   As per complaint the complainant had purchased a new laptop from 2^nd opposite party  (MSI ,Gaming Core i7 8th GEN 15.6 inch GAMING FHD thin and light laptop(8GB/1TB) HDD/Windows 10/4GB Graphics/black ,1.86Kg, GF63 8RC-239IN/B07GDRVDM8(HSN:841) vide invoice no.MAA4671295, dated 30/10/2018 through Amazon online shopping portal ordered on 25/10/2018 and delivered on 26/10/2018 which carried a warranty for 2 years and 3 months by paying Rs.74,089/- vide his father’s Debit card on 25/10/2018. The complainant submits that the aforesaid laptop keyboard was not working within few days from date of purchase and the complainant had raised a dispute with Amazon and the said laptop was replaced with  new one on 30/10/2018. The complainant further submits he upgraded the new laptop with a SOLID STATE DRIVE (SSD) Upgraded  with authorised MSI Service centre located at Egmore to serve the complainant’s sisters aeronautical engineering education purpose by paying Rs.354/-.  It is submitted in complaint that After a year the complainant approached the opposite party due to certain issues with the disputed laptop like slow performance, hanging, heating, dysfunction of keyboard and mouse at the opposite party’s service centre at egmore wherein he was informed that the opposite party’s service centre was shifted from egmore to adyar and the complainant had stated that he had taken his laptop on 16/09/2019 and the same was replied that the laptop was working fine and he took it back on 21/10/2019. The complainant submits that he approached the opposite parties with an issue of hinge panel misalignment which was examined and replaced with a new hinge panel and the same laptop was handed to the complainant in a week’s time along with a factory seal in the bottom of laptop. The complainant is again said to  have visited the opposite parties service centre  for the same hinge damage  which was subsequently shifted from egmore to nungambakkam on 17-11-2020 for which a memo form filled up by complainant with issues like “slow performance, touch panel shocking, web camera, hinge panel and heavy heating “ was addressed to the opposite party. The complainant herb submits that he was asked by the opposite party to bring the laptop charger ad the same has been followed by the complainant on the next day, 18-11-2020 further the opposite party advised the complainant that the laptop needed a Operating System change and hence requested for a pendrive so as to backup data, and also stated that the web camera and hinge panel got outdated to the complainant further requested him to resend the softcopy of the invoice while the complainant alleges that he had already produced the hard copy of the invoice and what was the need for the soft copy for which the opposite party replied that the hard copy of the invoice  was lost .The complaint alleges that the  opposite party took 4 days to  change the Operating System  that the opposite party had attended the services in an improper way adding that the complainant raised a complaint about the laptop issues various months ago for which the opposite party replied that the laptop was out of warranty for which the complainant lodged a web ticket with opposite party website and thereby getting a reply from the opposite party website the complainant submitted the same to claim his warranty till end of january 2021 for which the opposite party replied that they had not received any email regarding warranty statement of the  disputed laptop for which the complainant again raised a web ticket and the complainant’s complaint is said to have been accepted and was issued an RMA number only after a week by the opposite party .Being so the complainant alleges that he was requested by the opposite party to visit the service centre as the parts for change had arrived by 09-01-2021 and was made to wait at the opposite party service centre for 2 hours out of which the complainant alleges to have suffered out of mental agony due to disappointment and hardship. The complainant contends that he was informed by one serviceman that the hinge panel was fitted with fevikwick by breaking the ventilation frame provided the camera was working. The complainant alleges that the breaking up of ventilation frame and fixing the same with fevikwick after fixing the web camera was pure deficiency of service and unfair trade practice on part of the 1^st opposite party. The complainant further contends that the 2nd opposite party had delivered a laptop with manufacture defects and also states that the opposite party manufacturer was in Taiwan and not in India and they had been selling laptops only online while the 1st opposite party was only the Authorised Service centre of the MSI. The complainant also submits that the 1^st opposite party received the registered post dated 23-01-2021 but failed to respond to the same, while the registered post  dated 29-01-2020 sent to the Director of the MSI at Delhi  was returned with  “Wrong Address”. It is alleged by the complainant that he had waited for almost 7 months for a proper service, reply and replace of the disputed laptop with a new one and also said to have raised a complaint in the Hon’ble commissions about his grievances. It is alleged on part of the complainant that he had suffered of mental agony and stress .And hence prayed to refund the total sum of Rs.74,090/- along with 18% interest from date of purchase till disposal of complaint, to pay compensation for the mental agony and Rs.1,50,000/- for selling a laptop that had Manufacturing Defects and Rs.50,000/- towards for miscellaneous expenses incurred and cost of the complaint.  

4. As per ExA1 the complainant purchased a new laptop (MSI ,Gaming Core i7 8th GEN 15.6 inch GAMING FHD thin and light laptop(8GB/1TB) HDD/Windows 10/4GB Graphics/black, 1.86Kg, GF63 8RC-239IN/B07GDRVDM8(HSN:8417, serial no.K1808N0083173) vide Amazon order no.:405-7975778-2994734, dated 30/10/2018 through Amazon online shopping portal ordered and despatched on  25/10/2018 and also a ADATA XPG SX6000 Pro PCIe Gen3x4 M.2 2280 Gaming Solid State Drive (256GB) was also ordered on 25-10-2018 the same which was despatched on 26-10-2018 paying a total cost of Rs.74,089.99/-. The aforesaid laptop was replaced with a new laptop on 30-10-2018 based on order no. 408-9461787-6881169 dated 30-10-2018 with the invoice mentioned as “This is replacement issued free of cost against the original order” the total cost of the laptop mentioned as Rs.89,990/-  hence from Ex.A1 the first laptop dispatched on 25-10-2018 has been sold at a lesser price of Rs.20,009/- compared to the laptop ordered on 30-10-2018. Immediately after purchase the complainant handed over his newly purchased MSI laptop for SSD Upgrade along with the new SSD  SI.no: K1808N0083015 and then received by complainant after upgrading the SSD vide Invoice no.INCHN1819-001344 for which the complainant paid a cash of Rs.354/- dated  03-11-2018 found in Ex.A2. After 10 months the complainant gave the disputed laptop to avail service from the 1st opposite party who had shifted from Egmore to Adyar for which the complainant was provided with a Product Service Form on which the RMA number was RTI-19916047 where in the customer had placed complaint of ‘slow performance & hanging, mouse not working sometime’ dated 21-09-2019 as found in ExA3. After a year the complainant again submitted that his laptop was having issue of ‘Slow performance, Touchpad, Shock, Web camera, Heating, Panel as found in the job sheet of the 1st opposite party issued on 17-11-2020 ExA4. It is pertinent to note from ExA5 that the complainant approached the 1st opposite party in 25-06-2020 and 22-07-2022 for service which was denied stating that the disputed laptop was not in accord with the warranty service policy and insisted the complainant to contact the service team in MSI website in 1st opposite party’s email dated 22-07-2020. In the email conversation dated 14-12-2020 about his dissatisfaction on the opposite party’s service and evasion from servicing his laptop stating that his laptop was not covered with warranty for which the opposite party regretted for the inconvenience caused to the complainant and assured that the laptop carried a warranty till 30-01-2021 and further stated that the MSI was not providing onsite support and hence to visit their service center  and promised to  resolve the issues through his service centre if no CID(Customer Induced Damage).As per email dated 21-12-2020 the opposite party assured to resolve the complainants issue and followed by an email dated 26-12-2020 also stated that the issue would be resolved as soon as the necessary parts arrived at the service center. Later in email dated  12-01-2021 the opposite party takes another version that they  observed the laptop has been fixed with fevikwik to fix the bottom cover and upper cover ,and also the snaps of the same were sent to the 1st opposite party and same would be considered as CID and further insisted the complainant to visit the service centre  to replace any parts at the expense of the complainant. The complainant denied the same in his email dated 12-01-2021 and also alleged that he was not provided with the jobsheet for his laptop and also that his project work was pending which would lead to loss of marks and contradicts for blaming him and wanted to know about who used fevikwik to fix his laptop and enraged to face them legally. The 1st opposite party with ticket no.636737 informs in his email dated 13-01-2021 that they had received the pictures of the complainant’s laptop and also some spares to replace the LVDS cable to resolve the camera issues and that would be under the expense of the complainant and  also in his email dated 13-01-2021 the complainant alleged about the hardships caused due to change of opposite partys service centre from egmore to adyar and then to nungambakkam within  a span of 2 years and the laptop shifted to these 3 service centre had been fixed with fevikwik by someone in these service centres and that it doesnot mean the service centre has not done it just by sending pictures and also how they could order parts without opening the company seal. He also alleges that his laptop OS was reinstalled intentionally which had led to the slowing down of the system speed and also that he had lost lot of marks in his project. It is found that the complaint kept complaining about the laptop since march and was unable to search for service centre during covid and hence filed online complaints even after which his laptop issues were not resolved and also that the service men deleted the data in his laptop and he regretted for purchasing MSI laptop and also requested for all his jobsheets pertaining to the disputed laptop. The opposite party had replied that the inquiry regarding the manufacturer address would be replied by their concerned department as the 1st opposite party had forwarded his request to the concerned department. In the email dated 08-02-2021 and the opposite party had closed the case as the complainant failed to reply for the email dated 08-02-2021. The complainant had raised a complaint  with  the National Grievance cell so as to find a solution for the issue with disputed laptop, the 1st opposite party had replied for the same as there was an issue for which the 1st opposite party had replied that the customer’s warranty was initially in dispute which was resolved and a RMA number was created and pending subsequently after which there was delay in receiving tool from china and had been received and had been forwarded to the concerned service centre for rectification of defects in the disputed laptop and the issues would be solved at the earliest and the said complaint stands closed  and after this reply from the 1st opposite party the complainant has issued legal notice to the opposite parties .

5. There is no dispute that the complainant purchased a MSI laptop from Amazon online portal(MSI ,Gaming Core i7 8th GEN 15.6 inch GAMING FHD thin and light laptop(8GB/1TB) HDD/Windows 10/4GB Graphics/black, 1.86Kg, GF63 8RC-239IN/B07GDRVDM8 (HSN:8417, serial no.K1808N0083173), priced at Rs.69,990/- vide Amazon order no.:405-7975778-2994734, ordered and dispatched on  25/10/2018 and also a ADATA XPG SX6000 Pro PCIe Gen3x4 M.2 2280 Gaming Solid State Drive (256GB) was also ordered on 25-10-2018 the same which was dispatched on 26-10-2018 paying a total cost of Rs.74,089.99/.Within a few days from day of delivery the laptop keyboard did not function and the 1st opposite party had replaced the laptop with a new one with same brand and specification which had a bill price of Rs.89,999/-found in ExA1. Further the purchased laptop which was upgraded by the interest of the complainant by the 2nd opposite party service centre at Egmore with another SSD for the purpose of studies. There was no dispute until a disfunction arose after 10 months and the complainant gave the laptop with a request of “SLOW PERFORMANCE AND HANGING, MOUSE NOT WORKING SOMETIME “to the 1st opposite party  shifted to Adyar  the job sheet dated 21-09-2019.After 9 months the laptop showed up less performance, heat radiated from the laptop and also the hinge panel got misaligned and also the web camera stopped working for which the complainant raised a complaint with 1st opposite party and the same was replied by the opposite party that they would resolve the issue within 3 working days as per email dated 25-06-2020 while the 1st opposite party replied after a month on 22-07-2020 that the complainants laptop was out of warranty period and that the complainant would be charged for any parts purchased  and any service provided to the laptop and subsequently the 1st opposite party replied in 24-07-2020 requesting the complainant to visit the service centre for a solution regarding the laptop disfunction. On 14-12-2020 the complainant raised an email to the opposite party stating the frequent erratic working of the said laptop and the complainant has been visiting the 1st opposite centre at nungambakkam, the one shifted from adyar to nungambakkam where he was again denied service due to lack of warranty coverage, the 1^st  opposite party admitted in his reply that the complainant had a 3 month extended warranty till 30-01-2021 as per email dated 15-12-2020. As per email dated 26-12-2020 the 1st opposite party promised to service the disputed laptop once they have received parts that were to arrive at the service station for the servicing the said laptop, while they also take another version that the complainant had used adhesive to fix the hinge and the same was considered as Customer Induced Damage but failed to produce any proof for the same. If the complainant had used adhesive for fixing the panels it should have been noted down in the job sheet provided to the customer on the date of receiving the laptop from the customer which was not done by the opposite party. And the different versions of the 1st opposite party such as the laptop is out of warranty, by making the customer to run  from pillar to post and to search his remedy at 3 service centres within 2 years and the conduct of the 2^nd opposite party in not selling and replacing a defect free laptop and using adhesive to fix the hinge panel instead of replacing the hinge panel with a new one even when the laptop is under warranty and in vehemently avoiding to service the disputed laptop by stating one reason or other amounts to Deficiency of Service on the part of the 1^st and 2^nd  opposite parties.  Point no.1 answered accordingly.

6. POINT NO :2 :-

          Based on findings given in Point No.1 the complainant is entitled for refund of Rs.74090/- being the cost of laptop on handing over the disputed laptop to the opposite parties and also entitled for compensation of Rs.30000/- towards hardship and mental agony caused to the complainant and a sum of Rs.5000/- towards cost of the complaint.

          In the result the Complaint is partly allowed. The opposite parties 1 & 2 are jointly and severally directed to refund Rs.74090/- being the cost of the laptop to the complainant and the complainant is directed to return the disputed laptop to the opposite parties and the opposite parties are directed to pay Rs.30,000/- as compensation for mental agony and hardship caused to the complainant and to pay Rs.5000/- towards cost of the complaint to the complainant. The above amount shall be paid to the Complainant within two months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order, failing which the above said amount shall carry 9% interest from the date of order to till the date of payment.

Dictated by the Member-I 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 12^th day of  April 2023.

 

MEMBER – I                MEMBER – II                                 PRESIDENT

LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE COMPLAINANT:

Ex.A1	25.10.2018 & 30.10.2018	Invoice from the opposite party.
Ex.A2	03.11.2018	Copy of the adyar service center for upgrading SSD.
Ex.A3	16.09.2019	Copy of the adyar service center for laptop defects.
Ex.A4	17.11.2019	Copy of the opposite party’s service center for laptop defects.
Ex.A5	22.07.2020 to 11.02.2021	Email communications between the complainant and the opposite party and MSI.
Ex.A6	13.07.2020	Complainant raised the complaint to national consumer online complaint.
Ex.A7	23.01.2021	Notice sent by the complainant to the opposite party with acknowledgement.
Ex.A8	23.01.2021	Notice sent by the complainant to the MSI New Delhi with postal receipt.
Ex.A9	29.01.2021	Returned cover of New Delhi, MSI.

 

MEMBER – I                MEMBER – II                                 PRESIDENT

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

C.C.No.74/2021, Dated:12.04.2023 Order Pronounced,             In the result the Complaint is partly allowed. The opposite parties are jointly and severally directed to refund Rs.74090/- being the cost of the laptop to the complainant and the complainant is directed to return the disputed laptop to the opposite parties and the opposite parties are directed to pay Rs.30,000/- as compensation for mental agony and hardship caused to the complainant and to pay Rs.5000/- towards cost of the complaint to the complainant. The above amount shall be paid to the Complainant within two months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order, failing which the above said amount shall carry 9% interest from the date of order to till the date of payment.   Member-I       Member-II        President

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

C.C.No.62/2021, Dated:16.03.2023

Order Pronounced,

    In the result, the complaint is partly allowed. The  opposite parties 1 and 2 are directed to pay a sum of Rs.40000/- (Rupees Forty Thousand only) to the complainant towards deficiency in service in delay in delivering the vehicle to the complainant and also pay Rs.10000/- towards hardship and mental agony suffered by the complainant and also pay Rs.5000/- towards cost of the complaint. The above amount shall be paid to the Complainant within two months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order, failing which the above said amount shall carry 9% interest from the date of order till the date of payment.