Date of filing:- 16/02/2015
Date of Order:- 22/03/2016
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FOURM (COURT)
B A R G A R H.
Consumer Dispute Case No. 09 of 2015.
Kishore Kumar Debta, S/o Gajpati Debta, aged about 50(fifty) years, resident of Barpali Jagannath Nagar, Po/Ps. Barpali, Dist. Bargarh ..... ..... Complainant.
Prop. M/s Shibani Technologies, Gandhi Chowk, Main Road, Bargarh, Ps/Dist. Bargarh.
The Chief, Executive, Lenovo India Pvt. Ltd., Level-2 ferns Ikcon, Duter Ring Road, Doddanekundi Village, Maratha Hill, Opposite to Hotel seven K.R. Puram Hobli, Bangalore, Karnataka, Pin-560037. .... ..... ..... Opposite Parties.
Counsel for the Parties:-
For the Complainant :- Sri R.K. Satpathy, Advocate with other Advocates.
For the Opposite Party No.1(one):- Ex-parte.
For the Opposite Party No.2(two):- Sri D.K. Mohanty, Advocate with other Advocates.
-: P R E S E N T :-
Mrs Anjali Behera .... ..... ..... ..... ..... M e m b e r.(w)I/c President.
Sri Pradeep Kumar Dash ..... ..... ..... ..... M e m b e r.
Dt.22/03/2016. -: J U D G E M E N T:-
Presented by Sri Pradeep Kumar Dash, Member.
The Complaint pertains to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice enumerated under the provisions of Consumer Protection Act 1986. The gist of the Complaint briefed here under.
The Complainant named above has purchased one Laptop of Mark and Number Lenovo G, 510-59-398411 SN-CB-25560649 from the Opposite Party No.1(one) i.e. the local dealer to sell the Lenovo. Product on Dt.14/03/2014 for an amount of Rs. 37,700/-(Rupees thirty seven thousand seven hundred) only where as the Opposite Party No.2(two) is the manufacturer of the Lenovo Product.
The Complaint contends that after the purchase, the laptop started with different technical problems like “no powering on” for which intimation vide No.8003921503 on Dt.03/10/2014 was given to the Opposite Parties. The service engineer on Dt.14/10/2014 tested the Laptop and remarked that no powering on, physical burning etc. and was waiting for approval of RC for replacement. MB snap Shot was also sent to RC for replacement but having no response. Again on Dt.28/10/2014 the service engineer of Opposite Parties came and repaired the Laptop and further remarked that the system of Laptop is halted after operation of 5(five) seconds and ordered for required part and for no result. In response to request Dt.31/10/2014 the Consumer e-mail support team of Opposite Parties informed the Complainant on Dt.03/11/2014 that the technician would contact him before visiting but regretted for inconvenience vide g-mail Dt.04/11/2014.
Further the Complaint contends that in response to the g-mail request Dt.08/11/2014, the Opposite Parties vide Dt.19/11/2014 intimated the Complainant that defective parts shall be replaced but having no result. The service engineer vide several correspondence from Dt.21/11/2014 to 18/12/2014 failed to repair and rectify the defects in the Laptop. So a g-mail information for opting legal action against the Opposite Parties was sent on Dt.25/12/2014 by the Complainant and pleader notice on Dt.07/01/2015 sent to the Opposite Parties but the Opposite Parties took no steps for redressal of the allegation of the Complainant.
The Complainant lodged this Complaint for deficiency in service and sale of defective goods by the Opposite Parties to the Complainant and seeks the redressal of the Forum on account of his pecuniary loss, mental agony and harassment that he sustained and prays for the direction of Forum to the Opposite Parties for the replacement of the alleged Laptop or to repay the sale price along with interest. The Complainant further prays for compensation of Rs.50,000/-(Rupees fifty thousand) only and litigation expense of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees ten thousand) only.
The Complainant in support of his contention filed Xerox copies of the following documents.
Retail invoice Dt.14/03/2014 (1 sheet).
On site service report Dt.03/10/2014 and Dt.25/10/2014 (2 sheets).
Letter of Opposite Party Dt.03/11/2014 (1 sheet).
Letter of Complain Dt.31/10/2014 (1 sheet).
Letter of Opposite Party Dt.31/10/2014 (2 sheets).
Letter of Complain Dt.02/11/2014 (1 sheet).
Reply Dt.03/11/2014 by the Opposite Party No.2(two)(1 sheet).
Letter Dt.08/11/2014, 04/11/2014, 19/11/2014, 21/11/2014, 24/11/2014, 26/11/2014, 28/11/2014, 01/12/2014, 06/12/2014, 15/12/2014, 25/12/2014 of the Complainant (16 sheets).
Pleader Notice Dt.07/01/2015 (3 sheets).
Being noticed the Opposite Party No.1(one) appeared through his counsels by filing vakalatnama but did not file his version consequently for many dates, hence set ex-parte in this Complaint.
Notice was served on Opposite Party No.2(two) , Opposite Party No.2(two) appeared through his counsels and filed his version denying almost all the allegations of the Complaint.
The version of Opposite Party No.2(two) contends that the purchase of Laptop Lenovo G510-59-398411 SN-CB-25560649 by the Complainant needs strict documentary proof. Further para-3(three) of his version reveals that the averments in the Complaint do not involve, the Opposite Party No.2(two) for his participation in deficiency in rendering service to the Complainant. More over receiving intimation, the service Engineer of Opposite Party No.2(two) has received the Complaint call of the Complainant and has provided appropriate service by repairing the alleged Laptop to its original.
Further the version of Opposite Party No.2(two) contends that as per contention of Complaint para-4(four), the Opposite Party No.2(two) has supported the Complainant in rectifying the defects as and when informed and he (Opposite Party No.2(two)) is not liable for any deficiency in service to the Complainant. Further the version contends that defective parts were replaced and service was provided to the Complainant and the allegation of the Complainant for not providing effective service is a relative terms which do not amount to deficiency in service and the Complainant is required to prove his Complaint strictly through documentary evidence. The Opposite Party No.2(two) in its version admitted the delay if any in providing service due to non-availability of the required part of the Laptop at that time.
Further the version of the Opposite Party No.2(two) contends that the warranty for Laptop Lenovo G510-59-398411 SN-CB-25560649 covers only the repairing of the machine and not to replace the machine unless there is a grave technical defect which can not be cured or repaired. The warranty documents are annexed as Annexure –B with the version according to which replacement of alleged Laptop is beyond the provisions of warranty and is not sustainable is law.
Further contention of version is that for the allegation of pecuniary loss and mental harassment, the Complainant has to undergo with strict documentary proof and the Opposite Party No.2(two) in its version alleged the Complaint to be frivolous one causing irreparable damage to the good will of the Opposite Party No.2(two) and prayed the Forum to take appropriate action against the Complainant. Further more the version says the Complainant has no locus standi to file the complaint against the Opposite Party No.2(two) as the defect in the alleged Laptop has already been removed.
The Opposite Party No.2(two) has specifically denied any sort of deficiency in rendering service to the Complainant in any manner and alleging the Complaint to be frivolous, seeks the redressal of the Forum to dismiss the Complaint with cost against him.
The Opposite Party No.2(two) has also filed one written notes of argument and relies upon the xerox copies of some documents in support of his contention in the version.
On site service Report Dt.14/10/2014 and Dt.28/10/2014 (Annexure-1) 2 sheets.
Letter of complain Dt.31/10/2014, Dt.02/11/2014 and reply Dt.31/10/2014 by Opposite Party No.2(two) (Annexure-2) 4 sheets.
Letter of reply Dt.03/11/2014 by Opposite Party No.2(two) (Annexure-3) 1 sheet.
Letter of reply Dt.04/11/2014 by Opposite Party No.2(two), (Annexure-4) 1 sheet.
Letter of Complain Dt.08/11/2014 , (Annexure-5) 1 sheet.
Letter of Complain and reply Dt.19/11/2014 , (Annexure-6) 2 sheets.
Letter of Complain and reply Dt.21/11/2014 , (Annexure-7) 2 sheets.
Letter of reply Dt.26/11/2014 by the Opposite Party No.2(two) , (Annexure-8) 1 sheet.
Letter of reply Dt.28/11/2014 and Dt.01/12/2014 by the Opposite Party No.2(two) , (Annexure-9) 2 sheets.
Letter of reply by the Opposite Party No.2(two) , (Annexure-10) 2 sheets.
Letter of Complain, (Annexure-11) 2 sheets.
Carefully gone through the case record, perused the documentary evidence available
and heard pleadings of the Parties, the issues likely to be decided as follows:-
Whether the Complaint is maintainable before this forum under the provision of Consumer Protection Act-1986 ?
Is there any deficiency in service and sale of defective goods resulting in unfair trade practice by the Opposite Parties to the Complainant ?
What relief the Complainant is entitled for ?
Issue No.1(one)
In deciding this issue it is invariably established by the documents like the retail invoice Dt.14/03/2014 issued by the Opposite Party No.1(one) in favour of the Complainant and from other documents available on record and admitted by the Opposite Party No.2(two) in contention of his version that the Complainant has paid the consideration money/value to the Opposite Party No.1(one) and has purchased the Lenovo Laptop, bearing mark and number G510-59-398411 SN-CB255-60649 for his self use by means of his self employment and as per the provision enumerated in Sec. 2(1)(d)(i) of Consumer Protection Act-1986 the Complainant becomes a consumer of the Opposite Parties for purchase of goods and service.
More particularly the claim of the Complainant so also the territorial jurisdiction to file the complaint is well within the pecuniary and territorial jurisdiction of the Forum. The Lenovo limited warranty (Annexure-B) filed by the Opposite Party No.2(two) in its page-2(two) (your other right) allows the Complainant to enforce the legal right through applicable laws of state or jurisdiction which expressly allows the jurisdiction of this Forum. The vital component by virtue of the provision of Consumer Protection Act-1986 in Sec-3 this Forum also possess the concurrent jurisdiction to entertain the complaint for trail. In the ongoing discussion with provision of law and documents (evidence) available with the complaint, the present complaint is well maintainable before this Forum under the provision of Consumer Protection Act-1986. The issue No.1(one) is answered as above.
In furtherance of deciding Issue No.2(two) the Company Engineer deputed by the Opposite Party No.2(two) to attend the complaint lodged by the Complainant on Dt.03/10/2014, in its on site service report Dt.14/10/2014 has observed and remarked in its observation column that the Laptop was “not powering on, physical burring damage found”. More particularly the Company Engineer of Opposite Party No.2(two) has remarked and mentioned in its onsite service report that the received part also refurbish materials and he was in need of approval from R.C for replacement of M.B. Snapshot was also sent to R.C. The service engineer of Opposite Party No.2(two) on its onsite service report Dt.28/10/2014 has still observed and remarkably mentioned that “after replacing M.B., power is coming but additional problem found, system is halted after 5 seconds. So order for required party. It clearly reveals from both the onsite service reports Dt.14/10/2014and Dt.28/10/2014 that the parts used in the alleged Laptop are made of refurnished materials. Refurbished material means older defective and used material that have been restored to like new condition. The refurbished material are used in electronics devices having inherent manufacturing defects. Most refurbs don't come with a long warranty and refurbs are done by the third party Company not the original Company. The G-mail correspondence between the Complainant and the Opposite Party No.2(two), in which one more aspect is observed that the Opposite Party No.2(two) has requested the Complainant to have patience and co-operation to resolve the problem in the Laptop which proves the problem in the Laptop was never sought out. The conduct of Opposite Party No.2(two) in its G-mail reply to some what can be presumed to have approved the allegation of the Complainant. So in the light of discussions made above, the Opposite Party NO.2(two) in spite of such remarks made by his own company engineer as to use of refurbish materials in the Laptop kept silent over the matter which clearly shows the approval of Opposite Party No.2(two) for manufacturing such refurbished electronic device ( the alleged Laptop in this complaint) and the Opposite Party No.1(one) by selling such products are clearly responsible for guilty of selling defective goods to the consumer (the complainant in the instant case) which is clearly a case of unfair trade practice and both the Opposite Parties are held responsible for the deficiency in service caused to the Complainant, so also for the unfair trade practice. The Issue No. 2(two) is answered as above.
In answering to Issue No.3(three), the Complainant is entitled for the redressal described under the provision of Consumer Protection Act-1986.
Delving deep into the matter and the discussion made in the decided issues basing on the evidence in the record the Forum allowed the complaint and order as follows:-
The Opposite Parties are directed, jointly and severally, to pay the cost of the alleged Lenovo Laptop i.e. Rs. 37,700/-(Rupees thirty seven thousand seven hundred)only to the Complainant along with the compensation for mental agony, harassment and litigation expenses of Rs.3,000/-(Rupees three thousand)only within forty five days of this Order and take back the alleged Lenovo Laptop from the Complainant, failing which the total awarded amount shall carry interest @ 10% (ten percent) per annum till the actual realization of amount.
The Complainant is directed to return the alleged Lenovo Laptop to the Opposite Parties after receiving the awarded amount from the Opposite Parties.
The Complaint is allowed and disposed off accordingly.
Typed to my dictation
and corrected by me.
I agree, (Sri Pradeep Kumar Dash)
M e m b e r.
( Smt. Anjali Behera)
M e m b e r. I/c President
