Punjab

Sangrur

CC/350/2016

Jai Kathuria - Complainant(s)

Versus

Snapdeal . com - Opp.Party(s)

Shri Mohit Verma

14 Oct 2016

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SANGRUR.

                                                         

                                                Complaint No.  350

                                                Instituted on:    11.04.2016

                                                Decided on:       14.10.2016

 

Jai Kathuria son of Shri Ashwani Kumar, resident of H.No.37, Gali No.4, New Friends Colony, Sangrur.

                                                        …Complainant

                                Versus

1.             Snapdeal.com, 1^st floor, 246, Okhla Industrial Estate, Phase-III, New Delhi-110 020 through its Managing Director.

2.             H.P. Industries, 2F, Tower D&E, Building No.2, DLF Cyber Green, CLF Cyber City, Phase-3, Gurgaon (Haryana) through its Managing Director.

                                                        …Opposite parties

 

For the complainant  :               Shri Mohit Verma, Adv.

For OP No.1             :               Shri G.S.Toor, Adv.

For OP No.2             :               Shri Rahul Sharma, Adv.

 

 

 

Quorum:   Sukhpal Singh Gill, President

                K.C.Sharma, Member

                Sarita Garg, Member

               

 

 

Order by : Sukhpal Singh Gill, President.

 

1.             Shri Jai Kathuria, complainant (referred to as complainant in short) has preferred the present complaint against the opposite parties (referred to as OPs in short) on the ground that the complainant booked one HP Laptop model No.15-P210TX, S/N5CD5136MG5 with the OP number 1, which is manufactured by OP number 2 on the website of OP number 1 and the payment of Rs.50,090/- was made to the OP number 1 through his credit card from Sangrur, which was confirmed on the same date i.e. 6.5.2015.  It is further averred that the laptop was having a guarantee/warranty of one year.   It is further averred that after receipt of the laptop in question, when the complainant opened the box of laptop and used the same, it was found that the keypad of laptop touches with the screen of laptop and due to that reason the screen of the same started to damage. The complainant immediately intimated the said defects to the Op by mail, as such the engineer of the Op visited the house of the complainant and took the laptop with them in this regard and he issued job order sheet dated 30.6.2015 and thereafter the laptop was returned to the complainant with the assurance that the same problem will not occur in future.  After use of the same, the complainant found that the same problem was there in the laptop and intimated the Ops, and as such the engineer of the Ops visited the complainant on 23.7.2015 and issued the job sheet and the laptop was returned to the complainant on 24.7.2015, but the same problem was there in the laptop. Thereafter the Ops refused to listen the genuine complaint of the complainant.  Thus, alleging deficiency in service on the part of the OPs, the complainant has prayed that the Ops be directed to replace the defective laptop with new one or to refund its price along with interest @ 18% per annum from the date of its purchase till realisation and further claimed compensation and litigation expenses.

 

2.             In reply filed by OP number 1,  legal objections are taken upon  the grounds that the complaint is not maintainable, that no cause of action has arisen to the complainant and the complaint should be dismissed. On merits, it is admitted that the complainant placed an order to the seller M/s. Just Shopping Pvt. Ltd. Bangalore, and the product was delivered to the complainant. It is stated that the guarantee is provided by the manufacturer or seller. The Op number 1 merely acts as an intermediary.   It is stated that the complainant never requested the Op number 1 regarding the defect in the laptop in question.  It is stated that the Op number 1 has no concern at all with the sale of the laptop in question. It is stated further that the guarantee/warranty or any liability arises regarding the product then the responsibility is of the same is of the seller/manufacturer. Any deficiency in service on the part of the Op number 1 has been denied.

 

3.             In reply filed by OP number 2, preliminary objections are taken up on the grounds that the complaint is vague, baseless and has been filed with malafide intention, that the complainant is not a consumer and that there is no deficiency in service on the part of the OP number 2.  On merits, it is admitted that the complainant had purchased the product in question.  Further it is stated that on 6.5.2015, the complainant purchased a HP laptop in question for Rs.50,090/- from OP number 1 and it is further admitted that all the products are with one year warranty. It is stated that the laptop is a sophisticated electronic equipment consisting of various components and the working of the same depends on various facts such as proper electricity supply, proper handling of the same etc.   It is stated that whenever the complainant lodged any complaint of the laptop, the same was repaired to the satisfaction of the complainant by replacing the required parts.   It is stated that there is no manufacturing defect in the laptop in question. However, any deficiency in service on the part of the Op has been denied.

 

4.             The learned counsel for the complainant has produced Ex.C-1 copy of bill dated 6.5.2015, Ex.C-2 affidavit of expert, Ex.C-3 expert report, Ex.C-4 affidavit of the complainant, Ex.C-5 copy of order detail, Ex.C-6 and Ex.C-7 copies of job sheets, Ex.C-8 copy of expert report, Ex.C-9 copy of bil, Ex.C-10 copy of complaint, Ex.C-11 to Ex.C-17 copies of complaints and status report and Ex.C-18 and Ex.C-19 photographs and closed evidence. The learned counsel for OP number 1 has produced Ex.Op1/1 affidavit, Ex.Op1/2 copy of terms of offer for sales, Ex.Op1/3 copy of terms of use and closed evidence. The learned counsel for OP number 2 has produced Ex.OP-2 affidavit and closed evidence.

 

5.             We have carefully perused the complaint, version of the opposite parties and heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties. In our opinion, the complaint merits acceptance, for these reasons.

 

6.               Ex.C-1 is the copy of the bill dated 6.5.2015 issued by M/s. Just Shopping Pvt. Ltd. Bangalore for sale of the HP Pavilion Laptop in question of or Rs.50,090/-, which clearly proves that the complainant had purchased the laptop and availed the services of the OPs, which has been manufactured by OP number 2, whereas the OP number.  It is further an admitted fact of the complainant that the laptop in question purchased by the complainant became defective during the warranty period, as such the complainant recorded the complaint on 28.6.2015, as is evident from the copy of service call report Ex.C-6, wherein it is clearly mentioned that “replace the display RAW panel”.  Again Ex.C-7 is the copy of service call report issued by Aforeserve.com Ltd.  Further Ex.C-8 is the copy of expert report issued by India Computer and Electronics, wherein it has been stated that “the keypad of laptop touches the screen and damaging it which is visible with the naked eye and it has manufacturing defect and cannot be repaired.  Further Ex.C-10 to Ex. C-17 are the copies of email which supports the allegations of the complainant.  Further the complainant has also produced on record the photographs of the laptop Ex.C-18 and Ex.C-19. On the other hand, it is admitted fact that the laptop in question has been manufactured by the Op number 2, but despite repairs, the laptop in question was not set right by the Ops, as the laptop in question was having a manufacturing defect as the keypad of laptop touches the screen and damaging it which is visible with the naked eye and it is manufacturing defect and cannot be repaired. But, the Ops are silent on this point and nothing has been averred to rebut this allegation of the complainant. Further  the Ops have not produced any thing much less document on record to show that the same defect is not there in the laptop in question.  There is no explanation from the side of the Ops that why they did not produce any such evidence. To support the allegations of the complainant, he has produced his own affidavit Ex.C-4 and further the affidavit of Shri Vardaan Sharma expert, who checked the laptop in question and found the manufacturing defect therein.  As such, we feel that it is a clear case, where the Ops failed to set right the laptop in question within the warranty period.  Accordingly, in the circumstances, it is clear that the laptop in question supplied to the complainant is defective one and we further find it to be a clear cut case of deficiency in service on the part of the Ops. 

 

7.             In view of our above discussion, we allow the complaint of the complainant and direct OPs to replace the defective laptop of the complainant with a new one of the same make and model or in the alternative to refund to the complainant an amount of Rs.50,090/- being the cost of the laptop along with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the present complaint i.e. 11.04.2016 till realisation.  The OPs shall also pay to the complainant an amount of Rs.2500/- in lieu of compensation for mental tension, harassment and litigation expenses.

 

8.             This order of ours be complied with within a period of thirty days of its communication. A copy of this order be issued to the parties free of cost. File be consigned to records.

                Pronounced.

                October 14, 2016.

 

                                                (Sukhpal Singh Gill)

                                                     President

                               

 

                                                   (K.C.Sharma)

                                                        Member

 

 

                                                  (Sarita Garg)

                                                         Member