KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL

COMMISSION  VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

APPEAL NO. 234/15

JUDGMENT DATED:22.04.2016

PRESENT : 

JUSTICE SHRI. P.Q. BARKATHALI                         :  PRESIDENT

SHRI.V.V. JOSE                                                          : MEMBER

1. Co-ordinator,

IT @ School Project,

SCERT Building, Poojappura P.O,

Thiruvananthapuram.

: APPELLANTS

2. District Office,

IT @ School ,

Malappuram, PIN-676 505.

(By Adv: Sri. M. Nizarudheen)

                   Vs.

    1.                        Rasheeda K, Arabic Teacher,

AMLP School, Kuttippuram.

                                                                                                : RESPONDENTS

    2.                        R P Info Systems Pvt. Ltd.,

Aysha Tower, 43/2614,

K & K 5 Sastha Temple Road,

Kaloor, Kochi-18, Now Functioning at its-

Corporate Office, 4^th floor, Regent House-12,

Govt. Palace (East), Kolkata-700 069.

JUDGMENT DATED:30.4.2016

JUSTICE SHRI.  P.Q. BARKATH  ALI,  PRESIDENT

This is an appeal filed by the  2^nd and 3^rd opposite parties in CC.254/13 on the file of Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Malappuram challenging the order of the Forum dated December 10, 2014, directing the opposite parties to refund the price of the laptop of Rs.17,770/- with interest along with a compensation of Rs.10,000/-.

2.      The case of the complainant as detailed in the complaint before the Forum in brief is this:-

Complainant is a school teacher in A.M.L.P School, Kuttippuram.  He purchased a Chirag branded Laptop for a consideration of Rs.17,770/- under the Lap top/Note book for teachers scheme conducted by IT @ School from the office of the 3^rd  opposite party.  Within one month it became defective.  Though it was reported to the 1^st opposite party he was not ready to rectify it.  Therefore complainant filed the complaint for return of the price of the Laptop and claimed compensation.

3.      Only the 2^nd and 3^rd  opposite parties contested the matter before the Forum.  First opposite party remained absent.  Opposite parties 2 and 3 in their version denied the allegations in the complaint, but admitted the purchase of the laptop by the complainant and further contented thus before the Forum.  These opposite parties only arranged a common platform to the teachers’ community and various companies to provide lap top for cheaper prices.  Opposite parties 2 & 3 have no consumer relationship with the complainant.  Therefore complaint has to be dismissed.

4.      On the side of the complainant Exts.A1 to A4 were marked before the Forum and on the side of the contesting opposite parties Ext.B1 was marked before the Forum.  On an appreciation of evidence Forum found that there is deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties and directed them to refund the price of the lap top Rs.17,770/- with interest and a compensation of Rs.10,000/-.  Opposite parties 2 and 3 have now come up in appeal challenging the said order of the Forum.

5.      Heard both the counsels.

6.      The following points arise for consideration:-

1. Whether there was any deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties?
2. Whether the impugned order of the Forum can be sustained?

7.      The counsel for the appellants argued that they have nothing to do with the sale and warranty assured to the complainant by the company who supplied the lap top and that therefore for the defect caused to the lap top, they cannot be made responsible.   There is no substance in the above contention.  The purchase of the lap top from the first opposite party, under the Lap top/Note book for the teachers’ scheme conducted by the 2^nd opposite party is admitted.  The documents produced by the complainant shows that the same is defective.  Admittedly the lap tops are supplied under the Lap top/Note book for the teachers’ scheme conducted by the 2^nd opposite party and it was on their instigation complainant purchased the lap top.  Therefore the appellants cannot now content that they have nothing to do the transaction.  As the lap top has become defective and completely useless the opposite parties are bound to either replace the same or to pay the price of the same to the complainant.  The finding of the Forum on this point is confirmed.

8.      Forum has directed the opposite parties to refund the price of the lap top Rs.17,770/- with interest along with compensation of Rs.10,000/-.  We find no ground to interfere with the said finding of the Forum.

In the result appeal is dismissed with a cost of Rs.5000/-.

JUSTICE P.Q. BARKATHALI  :  PRESIDENT

V.V. JOSE : MEMBER

VL.