Advocate Shrinivas Kankurikar for the complainant
Advocate I.C.Shetty for the Opponents
*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-**-*-*-*-**-**-*-*-*-**-*-**-
Per Hon’ble Shri. V. P. Utpat, President
:- JUDGMENT :-
Date – 9th December 2013
This complaint is filed by consumer against dealer and company for deficiency in service u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. Brief facts are as follows-
[1] Complainant is resident of Kothrud, Pune. He is computer engineer and working in the filed of Information Technology. The Opponent No.1 is the retailer, selling the computers and other material relating with the information technology. Opponent No.2 is the head office of the Opponent No.1. Computer has purchased computer named and styled as ‘Apple 1 Mac 21’ from the Opponent No.1 for Rs.55,000/- including VAT. He has purchased the same for his domestic and personal use. He found some files in the P.C. which was purchased by him. He made inquiry with the Opponent No.1 and was satisfied on the points. According to the complainant, he has purchased the brand new computer but he found that it was used computer. Hence, he has filed present complaint for replacement of the computer as well as for compensation of Rs.10,000/- for mental and physical pains and inconvenience.
[2] Opponents resisted the claim by filing written version and denied the contents of the complaint. It is specifically denied that the complainant has purchased brand new computer from the opponent. It is the case of the opponent that complainant has purchased second hand computer and he was aware of the same at the time of purchase. The price of the said computer was Rs.84,000/- and that was used computer and rented to one company and subsequently it was sold out to the complainant for Rs.55,000/-. It is also contended by the Opponents that there is no question of warranty for second hand computer and there is no kind of deficiency in service. Opponents have prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
[3] After considering the pleadings, written argument and voluminous documents which are filed by both parties before this Forum and hearing the oral argument of both counsel, following points arise for my determination. The points, findings and reasons thereon are as follows-
Sr.No. | POINTS | FINDINGS |
1 | Whether complainant has proved that there is deficiency in service on the part of the Opponents ? | In the negative |
2 | What order ? | Complaint is dismissed |
Reasons
As to the point Nos. 1 and 2-
[4] The admitted facts between the parties are that the complainant has purchased computer from the Opponent No.1. It is the case of complainant that he had purchased brand new computer from the Opponent No.1 and it the case of the Opponents that complainant had purchased second hand computer knowingly, from them and there is no question of warranty and other obligations. In order to resolve this controversy, it is convenient to scrutinize the correspondence between the parties. It is significant to note that complainant is software engineer. He is not layman. In such circumstances, it is very difficult to digest that he had purchased the said computer blindly. It reveals from the correspondence by e-mail between the parties that the complainant was aware that it is a used computer and some files were down loaded from the P.C. The Opponents have produced the original bill of the computer and it reveals from the same that the price of the computer is Rs.84,552/- That invoice is dated 31/5/2007. Then copy of the bill as regards transaction between the complainant and the Opponents dated 7/5/2008 is disclosing that the price of the computer is Rs.55,000/-. The Opponents have produced the bill as regards hire of the computer to the third party dated 1/6/2007 and it reveals from the same that the opponent has received hire charges of Rs.29,120/- from the third party. It reveals from the e-mail which were sent by the complainant to the Opponents that the said transaction was done with one mediator named as Surya Ganapati and complainant had informed Surya Ganapati for removing the files from the said P.C. Eventhough the complainant is software engineer he has not inspected verified the computer which was purchased from the Opponent at the earliest. He has purchased the said computer on 7/5/2008 and he had made correspondence with the opponents after lapse of time. This indicates that complainant was aware about the condition of the computer. Besides the down loading of these files, there was no any material defect in the computer. Moreover warranty cannot be expected for the transaction of second hand goods. In these circumstances, I held that there is no substance in the complaint of the complainant. There is no deficiency in service. Hence, I answer the points accordingly and pass the following order-
:- ORDER :-
1. Complaint is dismissed.
2. As per peculiar circumstances there is no order as to costs.
3. Both parties are directed to collect the sets which are provided for the Members within one month from the date of order. Else those will be destroyed.
Copy of order be supplied to both the parties free of cost.
Place – Pune
Date – 09/12/2013
