Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

CC/160/2019

J Rajkumar - Complainant(s)

Versus

Ram Infotech - Opp.Party(s)

M/s P Pandian

04 Jan 2023

ORDER

                                                    Date of Complaint Filed :10.06.2019

                                                   Date of Reservation      : 27.12.2022

                                                   Date of Order               : 04.01.2023

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

CHENNAI (SOUTH), CHENNAI-3.

 

PRESENT: TMT. B. JIJAA, M.L.,                                             : PRESIDENT

                    THIRU. T.R. SIVAKUMHAR, B.A., B.L.,             :  MEMBER  I 

                   THIRU. S. NANDAGOPALAN., B.Sc., MBA.,       : MEMBER II

 

CONSUMER COMPLAINT No. 160/2019

WEDNESDAY, THE 4^th DAY OF JANUARY 2023

Mr.J.Rajkumar, Age-42,

S/o. Tr.Jagadeesan,

No.A2, Lakshmi Flats,

Chakkarabani Street,

Thirumalai Nagar,

Sembakkam,

Chennai-600 073.                                                                                                                        ... Complainant             

..Vs..

1.Ram Infotech,

Rep. by its Director,

No.102/6, Ground Floor,

L.B.Road,

Adyar, Chennai - 600 020.

 

2.Mr.A.Vijayan,

Director of Data Recovery Service,

No.102/6, Ground Floor,

L.B.Road, Adyar,

 Chennai - 600 020.                                                                                                                         ...  Opposite Parties

******

Counsel for the Complainant          : M/s. P. Pandian

Counsel for the Opposite Parties     : Exparte

 

On perusal of records, we delivered the following:

ORDER

Pronounced byMember-I, Thiru. T.R.Sivakumhar, B.A., B.L.,

1.      The Complainant has filed this complaint as against the Opposite Parties under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and prays to direct the Opposite Parties to pay a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- towards compensation for causing mental agony and to pay a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- towards delinquency in service and to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards expenses and to pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- towards transport charges along with cost of hard disk at Rs.8,000/-  and to pay a sum of Rs.200/- towards service charge paid to the Opposite Party.

2.     The averments of Complaint in brief are as follows:-

The Complainant had approached and given his hard disk (HDD) to the Opposite Parties on 21.07.2018 vide job receipt No.HDD6831A. It is identified by the Opposite Parties that the said hard disk has defects. As the hard disk contains memorable photos, various important documents it was informed to him that the photos, documents can be retrieved from the hard disk and informed him that the Opposite Parties would call within weeks time to collect the same. On assurance with firm belief had waited for week's time, since he has not received any calls, to get back the said hard disk he had visited to the Opposite Parties office in person and made calls several times to get back his hard disk but till now it was not rectified/returned by the Opposite Parties. In spite of his pleadings the defect in the goods was not made by the Opposite Parties which is indeed regrettable and highly unprofessional. On account of aforesaid negligence of duty and failure and neglect to rectify the same he had suffered from mental agony/ losses/ incurred expenses which the Opposite Parties are liable to compensate the Complainant. When he spoke to 2^nd Opposite Party several times over phone regarding the hard disk given for repair 6 months back, to his utter shock and surprise that the 2^nd Opposite Party had threatened him with dire consequences through his mobile number on 04.02.2019 time 07.25 p.m, 08.02.2019-01.41 p.m, 09.02.2019-time 02.47 p.m, and 18.02.2019 - 2.38 p.m, respectively and these calls were recorded by him. On 08.02.2019 he was asked to come to their office next day to get back his hard disk. When he went to the Opposite Parties office on 09-02-2019 where a hard disk was handed over to him and the hard disk's serial number concealed by a sticker doubted the Opposite Parties attitude he removed the label and found that the hard disk a different one which does not belong to him, his hard disk Serial No.Y26CS10Rs was clearly written in the receipt and it is purely nothing but cheating by the Opposite Parties. He had video recorded through his mobile what was happened with the Opposite Parties on 09.02.2019. The Opposite Parties have the greatest responsibility to take utmost care of his hard disk from any misplacement or damage. He had suffered mental agony and he was very much disturbed by the conduct and attitude towards him in rendering services. It is a crystal clear case of deficiency/negligent of service and harassment, and having threatened him with dire consequences. The above said act on the part of Opposite Parties had caused him great loss and damage besides mental tension, trauma and inconvenience and loss of value of money, and its a clear negligence and delinquency in service by the Opposite Parties and they have committed the offence of unfair and restrictive practice. The Opposite Parties had not handed over the hard disk (HDD) in respect of job receipt No.HDD6831A dated 21.07.2018, but it was not rectified/returned. The Complainant sent legal notices to the Opposite Parties on 24-04-2019 and the same were returned on 29-04-2019 endorsed as “refused". There is a consumer relationship between him and the Opposite Parties and therefore the Opposite Parties are covered under the Consumer Protection Act 1986. Hence the complaint.

3. The Complainant submitted his Proof Affidavit and Written Arguments. On the side of the Complainant, documents were marked as Ex.A-1 to Ex.A-5. The Opposite Parties did not appear before this Commission even after sufficient notice was served on them. The Opposite Parties remained absent and hence set exparte.

Points for Consideration

1. Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties?

2. Whether the Complainant is entitled for reliefs claimed?

3. To what other reliefs the Complainant is entitled to?

Point No.1:

On reading of the complaint and the exhibits marked in support of the complaint, from Ex.A-1 Job Receipt No.HDD6831A dated 21.07.2018 it is clear that the Complainant had handed over his Hard Disk bearing Serial No. Y26CS10RS and from the same it is found that the Data recovery testing amount of Rs.200/- been paid by the Complainant. As the Opposite Parties in spite of receipt of the hard Disk and fees towards data recovery from said Hard disk, had failed and acted lethargically in performing their part and failed to return back the hard disk after recovery to the Complainant, which constrained the Complainant to issue Legal Notice dated 24.04.2019 to the Opposite Parties explaining the happenings from the date of handing over his hard disk to them and the efforts taken by him from getting back the hard disk from the Opposite Parties as well as the assurances given by the Opposite Parties and about Opposite Parties had tried to hand over another hard disk other than the Complainant’s hard disk, as his efforts went in vain, had called upon the Opposite Parties to compensate monetarily for the deficiency and mental agony apart from seeking return of his hard disk, as found in Ex.A-2, the said legal notice, Ex.A-2 was refused and returned to the Complainant, as found in Ex.A-3 and A-4.

On discussions made above and on considering the facts and circumstances of the case, it is clear that the Opposite Parties having accepted the hard disk of the Complainant for recovering the data by collecting a fees of Rs.200/- on 21.07.2018 had failed to return back the hard disk of the Complainant after duly recovering the data, to the Complainant, in spite of repeated demands made and Ex.A-2. The said lethargic and negligent act of the Opposite Parties clearly amounts to deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties and thereby had caused serious mental agony to the Complainant. Accordingly Point No.1 is answered.

 

Point Nos.2 and 3 :-

As discussed and decided Point No.1 against the Opposite Parties, the Opposite Parties are liable to pay a sum of Rs.20,000/- towards deficiency of service and mental agony caused to the Complainant along with cost of Rs.5,000/-. Accordingly Point Nos. 2 and 3 are answered. 

In the result, the complaint is allowed in part. The 1^st and 2^nd Opposite Parties are directed jointly and severally to pay a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand Only) towards deficiency of service and mental agony caused to the Complainant along with cost of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand Only) to the Complainant, within 8 weeks from the date of receipt of this order failing which the amount of Rs.20,000/- shall carry interest @9% p.a from the date of receipt of this order till the date of realization.

          In the result this complaint is allowed.          

Dictated to Steno-Typist, transcribed and typed by her, corrected and pronounced by us in the Open Commission, on 4^th of January 2023.

 

 

S. NANDAGOPALAN               T.R. SIVAKUMHAR                 B.JIJAA

         MEMBER II                       MEMBER I                        PRESIDENT

 

List of documents filed on the side of the Complainant:-

 

Ex.A1	21.07.2018	Receipt of Ram Infotech
Ex.A2	24.04.2019	Legal Notice (copy)
Ex.A3	29.04.2019	RPAD Refused
Ex.A4	29.04.2019	RPAD Refused
Ex.A5	09.02.2019	C.D

 

List of documents filed on the side of the Opposite Parties:-

 

NIL

 

 

S. NANDAGOPALAN               T.R. SIVAKUMHAR                    B.JIJAA

         MEMBER II                       MEMBER I                         PRESIDENT