CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION-VII

DISTRICT: SOUTH-WEST

GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI

FIRST FLOOR, PANDIT DEEP CHAND SHARMA SAHKAR BHAWAN

CASE NO.CC/427/15

          Date of Institution:-    18.08.2015

          Order Reserved on:- 06.06.2024        

             Date of Decision:-      11.10.2024

IN THE MATTER OF:

Mr.AbhinavMehrotra,

Tower-3, B-3, New MotiBagh,

Shanti Path, New Delhi – 21

Permanent Address: 34, TashkandMarg,

Civil Lines, Allahabad - 01

.….. Complainant

VERSUS

1. Reliance Digital Store

Ambience Mall, 2^nd Floor,

Nelson Mandela Marg,

Vasant Kung, Delhi – 110070

2. Apple India Private Limited

Through its Managing Director

U. B. City, No.24 VittalMallya Road,

Bangalore – 560001

…..Opposite Parties

Suresh Kumar Gupta, President

1. The complainant has filed the complaint under section 17 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as Act) with the allegations that on 11.09.2010he has purchased Macbook Pro 13 bearing sr.  no.34031933ATM from OP-2. OP-2 namely i-store situated at Shop No.5, Ground Floor, Tirupati Shopping 4/755, Warden Road, Mumbai-4000026. The charger started giving problems in 2013 which was replaced with another charger purchased from OP-1 which is authorised dealer of OP-2. The new charger also started giving frequently problems as a result Macbook stopped working. He approached OP-1 to replace faulty charger upon which he was instructed to approach service centre of OP-2. He went to i-World Business Solution Pvt. Ltd. Ansal plaza, KhelGaon and service station acknowledged that charger/adaptor is faulty and offered to replace it free of cost. It was also informed that logic board of Macbook has crashed. The replacement of logic board will cost Rs.31,750/-, Rs.3,000/- as diagnostic charges and Rs.800/- as other expenses. The said amount is almost half of the purchase price of Macbook. His protest did not bring any result. A legal notice was sent to the OPs but in vain. Hence, this complaint.

2. The OP-1 has filed the reply to the effect that complaint is not maintainable as OP-1 is neither necessary nor proper party. Their liability does not extend to after sales service of the product or about the performance of the product. The complainant has not filed any proof of the purchase of the charger from OP-1. The complainant was informed by OP-1 to register the complaint with service centre of the manufacturer. The complaint against OP-1 has been filed without any cause of action.

3. The OP-2 has filed the reply to the effect that service report issued by i-World Business Solution Pvt. Ltd. shows that there is damage in the Macbook which is beyond the warranty period so no fault can be attributed to the device supplied by OP-2. The visual mechanical inspection of the Macbook done by i-world shows that Macbook pro was 2.5 years old which was out of warranty. A hardware issue was found with the main logic board and power adaptor of Macbook pro. This was in the year November, 2013. The charger was under warranty as it was purchased few days ago. The complainant has took the instance that charger has damaged the logic board and thereafter left the Macbook Pro and charger with the store. The out of warranty services with cost was offered by i-World but complainant refused to take the same. The damage to the Macbook Pro is solely attributable to the complainant’s own action which is in breach of the term of Apple warranty. The bald allegations are not sufficient to prove a case. The liability of the manufacturer arises only when there is an inherent defect in the product. The complainant has to adduce evidence that there is manufacturing defect in the product. There is no manufacturing defect in the product.

4. The complainant has filed the rejoinder wherein he has reiterated the stand taken in the complaint and denied the averments made in the written statements.

5. The parties were directed to lead the evidence.

6. The complainant has filed his own affidavit in evidence wherein he has corroborated the version of complainant and placed reliance on the documents Ex.CW1/1 – 1/3 though exhibits are not put on the documents.

7. OP-1 has filed the affidavitof Sh. Atul Tagore in evidencewherein he has corroborated the version of written statement.

8. OP-2 has filed the affidavit of Sh. PriyeshPovanna in evidence wherein he has corroborated the version ofwritten statement.

9. We have heard Ld. Counsel for the OP as complainant and OP-2 did not turn up on date fixed to address the arguments.

10. The perusal of the entire material on record shows that the complainant has made the payment for the purchase of the Mac book pro on 23.08.2010. It was purchased from i-Store run by Reliance digital. The complainant has taken the delivery on 11.09.2010 as this fact is nowhere disputed by the OPs.

11. The evidence led by the complainant shows that the charger was giving problem so it was replaced by the authorised service store of OP-2. The complainant has not disclosed the date of the replacement of the charger.

12. The evidence led by the complainant shows that new charger started giving problem and in the meantime Mac book stopped working. The evidence led by the complainant nowhere shows that when the charger/adapter started giving problem after the replacement of the charger. The complainant has to specify the month and year when the problem started in the Mac book pro due to alleged defective charger/adaptor. These details are missing.

13. The evidence led by the complainant shows that he has visited the i-World Business Solution Pvt. Ltd. i.e. authorised service centre of OP-2 and on checking the mac book pro it was found that charger is faulty which was replaced but the logic board of the Mac Book pro was found burned/crashed.

14. The authorised service centre report dated 12.11.2013 is annexed with the complaint by the complainant. The report shows that the logic board was found faulty which needs repairs against payment.

15. The defence of OPs is that Mac Book pro was out of warranty and that is why authorized service centre has demanded replacement/service charges of the faulty board.

16. The Mac Book Pro was purchased by the complainant on 11.09.2010. The warranty is for a period of one year. There is nothing on the record from the side of the complainant that warranty was of more than one year. In the absence of any material on record from the side of the complainant, the version of the OPs is relied that warranty was for one year.

17. On 23.11.2013, the Mac Book Pro was checked by authorised service centre of OP-2. The logic board was found damaged. The complainant has purchased Mac Book Pro around two years ago. He has not taken any extended warranty from the OPs. The warranty period has expired. The complainant has not placed any material on record when exactly the problem started in the Mac Book Pro. Mere bald allegation that there is manufacturing defect in Mac Book Pro is not enough. The complainant has to place on record the expert opinion that there is manufacturing defect in the Mac Book Pro. There is no evidence that logic board has burned or stopped working due to defect in the charger/adaptor. The best possible evidence is not placed on record to support the allegations. It is the duty of the complainant to lead the evidence that product is defective or there is manufacturing defect in the product even if the case goes uncontested. There is no evidence on record that adaptor has caused damage to the logic board or Mac Book Pro or any expert opinion to show that there is manufacturing defect in the product. The authorised service centre of the OP has rightly demanded the charges for repairing or replacing the logic board.

18. The complainant has failed to bring on record that there is any deficiency of service on the part of OPs so the complaint is dismissed with no order as to costs.

• A copy of this order is to be sent to all the parties as per rule.
• File be consigned to record room.
• Announced in the open court on 11.10.2024.