Ex-P A R T E O R D E R
PER SHRI. S.S. PATIL - HON’BLE MEMBER :
1) This is complaint regarding the defective gods (LCD Monitor) sold by the Opposite Party No.3 to the Complainant on 19/03/2010. The facts of this case as stated by the Complainant are that the Opposite Party No.1 is the Regional Manager of the Opposite Party No.2 – M/s. Mosebear India Ltd., who is the manufacturing company of the LCD Monitor. Opposite Party No.2 is the Executive, Customer Care Support of M/s. Mosebare India Ltd., which is situated at Delhi. Opposite Party No.3 is the Proprietor of M/s. R.V. Computers, who has sold the defective goods to the Complainant.
2)The Complainant had purchased 5 LCD Monitors (Computer Parts) from Opposite Party No.3 on 19/03/2010. However, one LCD Monitor of Sr.No.LO4KTMC 81008471A stopped working on 04/05/2010. Therefore, the Complainant has reported the matter to Opposite Party No.3 on 06/05/2010. Opposite Party No.3 complained to Opposite Party No.2 vide complaint no.0055666770007. The Service Engineer of Opposite Party No.2 attended the complaint and he told that there is a defect in P.C. Board of the said monitor but the P.c. Board is not available with the Company. Hence, the same would be substituted after one week. Thereafter, the Complainant contacted the Opposite Parties but there was no response from the Opposite Parties. Therefore, the Complainant vide his e-mail dtd.07/11/2010, complained to the Opposite Party. To this e-mail, the Opposite Party replied that the case has been closed and the Complainant should make a fresh complaint and obtain the complaint number. The Complainant again informed the Opposite Party that his complaint has not been redressed so far. To this e-mail, the Opposite Party No.1 has replied that an executive will be sent to the Complainant but nobody turned up and the problem was not solved.
3)The Complainant has further stated that because of the defective LCD Monitor the Complainant has sustained financial loss and it caused inconvenience to the students of the Complainant who use this monitor to run his computer class.
4)Lastly, the Complainant has prayed for @ a sum of Rs.63,000/- as the computer was not working since last 9 months.
5)Rs.10,000/- for mental agony and a sum of Rs.8,000/- towards the cost of this complaint.
6)Contrary to the above prayer, the Complainant has specifically stated in para 3, the nature of the complaint is to substitute the defective article.
7)The Complainant has attached the xerox copies of the following documents in support his complaint.
Tax Invoice-cum-Challan, E-mails & Notes.
8)The complaint was admitted and notices were served on the Opposite Parties. The representative of Opposite Party No.1 & 2 Shri. Chandrashekhar Belhe appeared on behalf of Opposite Party No.1 & 2 on 18/03/2011 and filed under taking requesting to grant time to file their replies. But thereafter nobody from Opposite Party No.1 & 2 appeared before this Forum. One Mr. Vicky S. Jaiswal, Sales Executive of Opposite Party No.3 appeared before this Forum on 11/11/2011 and filed his application stating that Opposite Party No.3 is the Supplier and he has done his duty to satisfy the dispute. It is further clarified by him that Opposite Party No.3 does not have the liability towards the defective LCD Monitor. The liability of the defective goods is on Mosebear India Ltd.
9)Opposite Party No.1 & 2 did not file their written statement, affidavit and written argument. At the time of oral argument we heard the Complainant in person and perused the documents filed by him. We also perused the application filed by Opposite Party No.3. Our findings are as follows –
The Complainant had purchased 5 Mosebear 15.4 LCD Monitors valued at Rs.20,500/-. Each LCD Monitor’s cost being Rs.4,100/-. This fact was never averred by the Complainant in his complaint. The service engineer of Opposite Parties also admitted that the PCB board of the monitor bearing No.L04KTMC81008471A is defective. The Opposite Parties have apologized for this defect and sent their engineer to rectify the defective PCB board of LCD Monitor within 48 hours. But the Opposite Party No.1 & 2 never sent the engineer and rectified the problem. Then the Complainant has again complained on 07/11/2010 and then followed up the complaint, but the problem was not settled except enquiring about the Complainant’s TFT of last complaint by Opposite Party No.2. Shri Varun Upadhyay, on the behalf of the Complainant again sent the particulars of the complaint as well as particulars of defective LCD Monitor on 17/11/2010. The Opposite Party No.2 replied to this e-mail that the complaint has been sent to concerned department and thereafter there is no response form the Opposite Party No.1 & 2.
10) From the above facts it is clear that the LCD Monitor valued at Rs.4,100/- was defective piece sold by Opposite Party No.3. From the papers it appears that Opposite Party No.2 is the manufacturer of the said monitor and Opposite Party No.2 is the Regional Manager. Therefore, in our candid view these all 3 Opposite Parties were jointly and severally liable for the defective piece of LCD Monitor. However, in the prayer clause, the Complainant has not prayed for the new LCD Monitor or PCB Board or the value of the monitor paid by him to the Opposite Party No.3 but he has prayed for Rs.63,000/- as a loss sustained by him. Because of this defective monitor, his working of computer class was hampered and he sustained a monthly loss of Rs.7,000/- because of the defective monitor. The Complainant has not explained how he sustained the loss of Rs.63,000/-. This is a complaint regarding the defective LCD Monitor. Under Consumer Protection Act, 1986, the defective goods purchased by the consumer can be substituted or the price of such item can be reimbursed to the Complainant.
11) The other prayer of the Complainant is for compensation for mental agony and cost of this complaint. Taking into consideration the cost of the defective LCD Monitor, the amount of compensation and cost prayed for, appears to be more than what should be. Therefore, in view of the above observation, we pas the following order -
O R D E R
a.Complaint No.14/2011 is partly allowed.
b.Opposite Parties No.1, 2 & 3 are jointly and/or severally liable for the defective LCD Monitor purchased by the Complainant.
c.Opposite Parties No.1, 2 & 3 are directed to pay Rs.4,100/- (Rs. Four Thousand One Hundred Only) to the Complainant jointly and/or severally alongwith interest @ 9% p.a. from 06/05/2010 till payment and the Complainant should return the defective piece of LCD Monitor to Opposite Party No.3
d.Opposite Parties No.1, 2 & 3 are also directed to pay Rs.3,000/-(Rs.Three Thousand Only) to the Complainant jointly and/or severally for causing mental agony by selling a defective LCD Monitor to the Complainant.
e.Opposite Parties No.1, 2 & 3 are directed to pay Rs.2,000/- (Rs. Two Thousand Only) to the Complainant jointly and/or severally towards cost of this complaint.
f.Opposite Parties No.1, 2 & 3 are directed to comply with the above order jointly and/or severally within 30 days from the receipt of this order.
g.Certified copies of this order be furnished to the parties free of cost.
