DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BATHINDA

C.C.No. 271 of 09-10-2019

Decided on : 16-03-2023

Vipin Kumar @ Bipan Kumar aged about 40 years S/o Sant Ram R/o #9069, Kali Vakeel Wali Gali, Street No.2, Back Side Bus Stand, Bathinda, Tehsil & District Bathinda.

........Complainant

Versus

1. Reliance, Reliance Retail Limited, Reliance Digital, Barnala Road, Bathinda.

2. ResQ SVC ADEV Electronics, #19416, Street No.3, Bibi Wala Road, Dr. Bakshi Wali Gali, Bathinda, Tehsil & District Bathinda.

.......Opposite parties

Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

QUORUM

Sh. Lalit Mohan Dogra, President

Sh. Shivdev Singh, Member

Present :

For the complainant : Sh. Deepak Dass, Advocate.

For opposite parties : Sh.Varun Gupta, Advocate.

ORDER

Lalit Mohan Dogra, President:-

1. Vipin Kumar @ Bipan Kumar, complainant (here-in-after referred to as 'complainant') has filed this complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (here-in-after referred to as 'Act') (Now C.P. Act, 2019) before this Forum (Now Commission) against Reliance Retail Limited and another (here-in-after referred to as 'opposite parties').

2. Briefly stated, the case of the complainant is thathe purchased one Laptop brand Lenovo Model Mix 320 on 24.05.2018 of Rs.20,186/- from opposite party No.1. The opposite party No.1 at the time of selling the Laptop assured the complainant that it will work properly and there is no defect in the Laptop.

3. It is alleged that the opposite party No.1 also offered the complainant additional warranty/guarantee under My ResQ Plan on payment of additional amount. The opposite party No.1 assured the complainant that if during the period of plan any defect occurred in the Laptop then they will repair the same without any payment and in case it is non-repairable, then new Laptop will be provided without any payment. So, complainant took My ResQ Plan warranty/guarantee for the period of 24.05.2019 to 24.05.2023 and also paid additional amount as demanded by opposite party No.1.

4. It is alleged that Laptop of complainant suddenly stopped working i.e. its touch and keyboard stopped working. The complainant visited the office of opposite party No.1 and produced Laptop alongwith bill and My ResQ Plan certificate. The opposite party No.1 asked the complainant to visit the office of opposite party No.2 and accordingly complainant visited the office of opposite party No.2 on 09.07.2019 The opposite party No.2 after checking the Laptop asked the complainant that the complainant had to give Laptop to opposite party No.2 for its repair. The complainant delivered the Laptop to opposite party No.2 on 09.07.2019 and opposite party No.2 gave assurance to complainant that it will be returned to the complainant in working condition within a week. The opposite party No.2 also issued job sheet to the complainant.

5. It is also alleged that the complainant visited the opposite parties many times, but the opposite parties always put the matter on one pretext or the other and asked the complainant that the Laptop will be given within 2-3 days in working condition, but despite of lapse of 3 months opposite parties failed to give Laptop to the complainant in working condition and also failed to provide new Laptop in place of old one. The complainant requested the opposite parties many times to hand over his Laptop after repairing the same or give new Laptop as per plan and warranty/guarantee, but opposite parties failed to do the same and ultimately refused to redress the grievances of the complainant, The complainant also got served legal notice upon the opposite parties in this regard, but to no effect. Due to act and conduct of the opposite parties, complainant has suffered great mental tension and harassment for which he claims compensation to the tune Rs.2,00,000/-.

6. On this backdrop of facts, the complainant has prayed for directions to the opposite parties to return the Laptop in working conditions or give a new Laptop in place of it and to pay Rs. 2,00,000/- as compensation besides Rs. 33,000/- as litigation expenses.

7. Upon notice, opposite parties appeared through counsel and contested the complaint by filing joint written reply raising preliminary objections/submisions that the present complaint is purely an abuse of process of law.

8. It has been pleaded that The opposite party No. 1 is a Store from where complainant purchased Lenovo Laptop & Opposite Party No. 2 is a service arm of Opposite Party No. 1 who provides service to the Customers who subscribes to the plan of the extended warranty. As the opposite parties are Retailers and not manufacturer of any product, hence only responsible to provide service & remove the alleged defect in the product provided the spare part is provided by the concerned manufacturer. The said Laptop has been manufactured by Lenovo alone who is a separate legal entity, thus being Manufacturer of the product, is responsible for the alleged defect in the product and the complainant has erred in not arraying him as one of the opposite party. That the complainant has suppressed the material facts and is trying to mislead this Commission.

9. It has also been pleaded that the true facts in the instant matter is that after the complainant informed the opposite Party No. 2 alleging defect in the Lenovo Laptop, the opposite party No. 2 immediately registered the complaint and Engineers of the opposite party No. 2 visited the recorded address of the Complainant and were quickly able to detect the problem. As the opposite parties are only Retailer of the product and also provides Service under the Resq Care Plan, indent of the same was raised immediately and sent to the Manufacturer of the Laptop i.e. Lenovo and waited for the said part. As even after continuous follow up with the Lenovo, the said replacement part was not provided and finally the Manufacturer stated that the spares required to remove the defect in the product is not available. The same was communicated to the complainant and as per resQ terms & condition, the opposite party No. 2 offered commercial solution to the complainant and as per terms, was ready to provide 80% of the cost of the product but the complainant refused the said offer & insisted to provide replacement of defective laptop with new laptop which was refused by the Opposite Party No 2 as it was beyond the agreed terms of resQ Care Plan. Even after continuous follow up by opposite party No. 2, the opposite party No. 2 did not receive any response from the side of the complainant and kept insisting for new laptop or refund of the amount which was outside the scope & terms of the ResQ Care Plan (RCP). There was no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties.

10. On merits, the opposite parties have admitted that complainant visited the Store of the opposite party No. I and purchased laptop. It has been pleaded that the cost of the said Laptop was Rs. 15,750/- and not Rs. 20,186/- as mentioned by the complainant in his complaint and it was never stated that the Laptop would be replaced in case it is found beyond repair. The complainant offered 80% of the price of Laptop i.e. Rs.12600/- as per terms of the resQ Care Plan (RCP) but the Complainant refused the same. The product in question was purchased on 24/05/2018 and as per agreed terms between the complainant and opposite party No. 2, depreciation policy will be attracted for the commercial solution under ResQ warranty. The opposite party No.2 is still ready to comply with the terms of the RCP and ready for commercial solution and offer 80% of the product purchase value i.e. Rs.12,600/-. After controverting all other averments of the complainant, the opposite parties prayed for dismissal of complaint.

11. In support of his complaint, the complainant has tendered into evidence his affidavit dated 30.9.2019 (Ex. C-8) and the documents (Ex. C-1 to Ex. C-7).

12. In order to rebut the evidence of complainant, opposite parties tendered into evidence affidavit of Rakesh Saini dated 20.11.2019 (Ex.OP-1/1) and photo copy of terms and conditions (Ex.OP-1/2)

13. We have heard learned counsel for complainant and gone through the file carefully.

14. The counsel for the opposite parties has admitted to have received the Laptop from the complainant for repair and further admitted that the opposite parties had offered to refund 80% amount of sale price to the complainant as per resQ Care Plan (Ex. OP-1/1). However, a perusal of OP-1/1 shows that it is written in the said resQ Care Plan that if the product is not repairable due to unavailability of parts, then below mentioned compensation value will be given but in the present case, the opposite parties have not placed any evidence that which was the defective part and what was the availability status of the same. Accordingly, complainant is entitled to receive complete value of the Laptop i.e. Rs. 20,186/- which is mentioned in invoice Ex. C-3.

15. Accordingly, present complaint is partly allowed. The opposite parties are directed to pay Rs. 20,186/- to complainant alongwith interest @9% p.a. from the date of filing of complaint till realization. No order as to costs.

16. The compliance of this order be made by the opposite parties jointly and severally within 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

17. The complaint could not be decided within the statutory period due to heavy pendency of cases.

18. Copy of order be sent to the parties concerned free of cost and file be consigned to the record room.

    Announced:-

    16-03-2023

    (Lalit Mohan Dogra)

    President

     

     

    (Shivdev Singh)

    Member ​