CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KOTTAYAM.

Present

    Sri. Santhosh Kesavanath P. President

 

                                                                                                                                      Sri. K.N. Radhakrishnan, Member

 

CC No.357/09

 

Saturday, the 29^th day of January, 2011

 

Petitioner                                              : P.T. Syriac(Capt Retd)

                                                             Pokkamathanam (H)

                                                             Mariathuruthu PO,

                                                             Varissery, Kottayam.

 

                                                             Vs.

 

Opposite party                                     : M/s. Online I.T shope,

                                                               K.S.C.A.R.D.B Buldg,

                                                               Near Mathurubhoomi,

                                                               M.C. Road, Kottayam.

                                                               (Adv.K.Kuruvilla John)

                       

 

 

            The case of the complainant is as follows. He had purchased a computer from the opposite party on 9-10-2007/- for an amount of Rs. 19,000/-. Some of the components supplied were malfunctioning. On enquiry the owner of opposite party Mr. Shinu Antony told that for better product and the complainant purchase them for Rs.3350. Just within two months ie the total cost is 19000+3350 = 22350/-. Presently the complainant on a comprehensive AMC with the opposite party expiring on 4-2-2010. The AMC was taken immediately after the warranty was over this coasted me Rs.15000/-. Whenever reported the complaints the opposite party said that they would send representative, but never before 3 to 5 working days. Many times they could not complete the work and they disappear. Again after follow up after 2/3 days they come and do. From September 2008 the problem in accute. The representative who came after a week of calling said the CPU in defective. He removed the component from the CPU and after 10 days brought it back and fitted it the computer did not still work them after 3 days came and removed the whole CPU unit. They tried the level best but could not rectify. The complainant called and told the owner that the computer still or working properly(going off very often), he told that the usual replying that they would look into it till today nobody bothered. Now from 19^th November it is totally down. They promised to send rep. on 20^th. 20^th they said on 21^st Rep. would come 21^st they said only on 23^rd the complainant had no confidence in them from the past 2 years of experience that some one would come on 23^rd also and that the problem would be solved. The above act of the opposite party amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. Hence this complaint.

            The notice was served with the opposite party. They appeared and filed their version contending as follows. The complaint is not maintainable either in law or on facts. Whenever the complainant reported complaints about the computer, the representatives of the opposite party went to the complainant’s residence and repaired the computer and make the computer working smoothly. On 21-11-2009 the complainant reported complaint about the computer that the computer was not working. On 23-11-2009 itself the representative went to the complainant’s residence and repaired the computer and makes the computer working. In the worksheet dated 23-11-2009, it was recorded that “Display OK”. The complainant signed in that worksheet. The notice from this Forum was sent to the opposite party on 23-11-2009. Before receiving the notice, on 23-11-2009 itself complainant’s computer was repaired and make the display O.K. Now the disputed computer is working without any defect. The complainant purchased the computer in December 2007. The computer has one year warranty. The warranty expired in December 2008.   Again the complainant has taken AMC for one year in February 2009. From December 2007, the complainant was using the computer. After prolonged use, the complainant is demanding the refund of the price of the computer. This is unjustifiable. AMC is meant only for maintenance only. The refund of the price of the computer is not included in the AMC. Hence the complaint may be dismissed with costs.

            The complainant examined as PW1. and the documents produced which are marked as Exhibits A1 to A4. The opposite party produced document which is marked as Exhibit B1.

            Heard both sides. We have gone through the complaint, version, documents and evidences of both sides. The case of the complainant is that the opposite party has not properly attended the defects of the computer as and when informed by the complainant. According to him even after attended to service the opposite party computer was not properly working. The opposite party has taken a contention that as and when intimated by the complainant the opposite party and their servicemen properly attend the computer of the complainant. According to the opposite party there was no deficiency in service on their part in attending the service of the complainant’s computer. From the available documents and evidences it can be seen that there was some problem in the complainant’s computer. But from Exhibit B1 it can be seen that the complainant’s problem in the computer was rectified on 23/11/09. At present the complainant’s problem, was rectified and the computer was in a working condition.

            In the above circumstances we direct the opposite party to consider the complainant’s grievances if any in future. Hence we are of the opinion that the case of the complainant is to be dismissed. In the result the complaint is dismissed.

                        Sri. K.N. Radhakrishnan, Member                    Sd/-

Sri. Santhosh Kesavanath P. President Sd/-

           

 

Ext.A1- is the invoice.

Ext.A2- is the invoice dtd 8-12-2007

Ext.A3-is the AMC

Ext.A4 series (5 nos)

Ext.B1 is the copy of Job card dtd 23-11-2009

 

By Order,

 

 

Senior Superintendent.