Smt.D.Shylaja filed a consumer case on 21 Nov 2023 against Sri.Sudarshan in the Kolar Consumer Court. The case no is CC/111/2023 and the judgment uploaded on 04 Dec 2023.
Karnataka
Kolar
CC/111/2023
Smt.D.Shylaja - Complainant(s)
Versus
Sri.Sudarshan - Opp.Party(s)
21 Nov 2023
ORDER
Date of Filing: 14/07/2023
Date of Order: 21/11/2023
BEFORE THE KOLAR DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, OLD D.C. OFFICE PREMISES, KOLAR – 563 101.
Dated:21stDAY OF NOVEMBER 2023
SRI. SYED ANSER KALEEM, B.Sc., B.Ed., LL.B., …… PRESIDENT
SMT. SAVITHA AIRANI, B.A.L., LL.M., …..LADY MEMBER
CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO:111/2023
Smt. D. Shylaja.
W/o. Leonathjir R
Aged about 33 years,
Employee of Muthoot Finance Ltd,
R/at Bharath Nagar,
BEML Layout,
K.G.F.
(Rep. by Sri. K. Manjunatha. Advocate) ……. Complainant.
- V/s –
Sri. Sudarshan.
Proprietor/Authorised Signatory,
S.S. Distributors (Sudarshan Distributors),
L.G. Show Room, 1st Cross,
Robertsonpet,
K.G.F, Kolar District-563122.
2) The Managing Director,
Hewlett Packard Global Soft Pvt,
(HP Company) E.C.2 Campus,
HP Avenue (Survey No.39 PART),
Electronic City Phase II,
Hosur Road,
Bengaluru-560 100.
The Managing Director,
HP Computing Printing Systems
India Pvt. Ltd.,
GF, Global e-Business,
Ops Pvt.Ltd.,
No.66/2 Ward No.83,
Bagamane Tech Park,
7th Floor-A wing,
“Embassy Prime”
C.V. Raman Nagar,
Bengaluru-560 093.
(Exparte)..….Opposite Parties.
-: ORDER:-
BY SMT.SAVITHA AIRANI, LADY MEMBER.,
The complainant has filed this complaint Under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act 2019 against the OPs alleging deficiency in service and prays to direct the Ops to replace the laptop purchased by the complainant or to pay a sum of Rs.61,999/- along with interest @ 18% P.a and to award compensation to the complainant in respect of court expenses, mental agony, pain and future loss income and also cost of proceedings in the interest of justice and equity.
The brief facts:- The complainant joined the on-line SQL course (Structure Quiry Language). The said course needs Laptop, the above said course fee is Rs.20,000/- paid by the complainant. Further complainant stated that, the complainant had purchased the one Laptop Model No.155 FR 2005 TU SI. No. 5CDO474HT3 from the Op No.1 showroom for sum of Rs. 62,000/- (61,999.99 as per invoice) invoice No. A01057 with 12 installments. Further complainant stated that, the complainant paid a sum of Rs. 22,000/- as down payment out of 12 installment for remaining 8 installments was fixed by the Op No.1 and loan was taken from the Bajaj finance Ltd, Kolar, sum of Rs. 5,000/- for each installment was fixed On 02/01/2023 sum of Rs. 5,167/- was deducted from the complainant’s account by the Bajaj Finance.
Further complainant stated that, at the time of purchasing the laptop, complainant and her husband both are asked to show the working condition of the Laptop but Op did not Opened and shown the working condition of the above said Laptop, simply packed and handover to the complainant. The complainant charged for about 4 hours and she tried to switch on the Laptop but it was not opened. Further stated that, the complainant informed the Op No.1 and customer care on 01/12/2022 about the condition of the Laptop, on 12/12/2022 technician of the Op No.2 came and checked the above said laptop and they said laptop was manufactured about two years ago, hence it cannot be repaired by them. They also told that, the Op No.1 showroom should return it back to manufacture company they sold to you. Then the complainant requested the Op No.1 for replacement of the above said laptop but the OP No.1 refused for replacement of the above said laptop.
Further complainant stated that, in the mean time financier was demanding the complainant to pay the installments. Further complainant stated that, the Op No. 1 distributer as billed for some other product of Laptop, all these facts are clearly shows that OP No.1 cheated her.
Further complainant stated that, she has issued a legal notice to OP No.1 to rectify its mistake, and to provide new laptop by replacement. The above said notice served to OP No.1 and the OP No.1 gave untenable reply to notice.
In the reply notice Op No.1 stated that, he is not responsible for the defect in the above said Laptop. The OP No.2 and 3 are responsible. Hence complainant made OP No.2 and 3 are necessary parties to this complaint. Further complainant stated that, complainant issued legal notice to Op No.2 and 3, but there was no reply given by them. Then the complainant and her husband register complaint through E- mail to the customer care, Bangalore vide case No.ID 5096194939. The customer care office after checked the case and replied to the complainant that, the Op no.1 sold two years old product kindly check with dealers for DOA and they are evaluated the complainants HP customer support case ID 50961939 for the issue reported but the Op No.1 did not taken any needful action .
Further complainant stated that, the Op No.1 gave the 2 years old product instated of that, to return it back to the company. It is the duty of the Op No.1 to give a good product to its customer but the complainant had a good faith on HP company so she go for buy the HP product from the act of the OP NO.1 company will lost its name and fame in the society. The complainant suffered a lot of troubles and mental agony due the act of the Op No.1. Hence this complaint.
On issuance of notice to the OP No.1 to 3, despite service of notice OP No.1 to 3 remained absent and thereby failed to answer the claim of the complainant under these circumstances Op No. 1 to 3 are placed exparte.
In order to prove the case of the complainant, complainant filed their affidavit evidence along with the copies of the documents.
On the basis of the pleadings the following points will do arise for our consideration:-
(1) Whether complainant has proved deficiency in service on the part of the Op No.1 to 3 as alleged in the complaint?
(2) Whether the complainant is entitled for the relief as sought in the complaint?
(2) What Order?
Our findings on the above points are:-
POINT (1) & (2):- In the Affirmative.
POINT (3):- As for the final order.
REASONS
POINT No. (1) & (2): On perusing the pleadings of the party, these two points are interlinked to each other and for the sake of brevity and for the sake of convenience we have taken up these points together for common discussion.
We have perused the pleadings averred in the complainant petition along with evidence placed on record. It is the specific case of the complainant is that, the complainant had purchased the one Laptop Model No. 155 FR 2005 TU-HP SI.No.5CD0474HT3 in Op No.1 showroom on 30/11/2022 for a sum of Rs. 62,000/- (61,999099 as per the invoice) on installment basis. Invoice No. A01057 with 12 installments out of 12 installments the complainant paid 4 installments amount of Rs. 22,000/- as down payment to the Op No.1 at the time of Purchasing the Laptop, for remaining amount of 8 installments are fixed by the Op No.1 and loan from the Bajaj Finance Ltd., Kolar.
It is stated that, subsequent to the purchase of the said laptop complainant was charged for 4 hours and then complainant tried to switched on the laptop but it was not switched on/opened. The main grievance of the complainant is that, the above said laptop started problem from day one itself. Hence the complainant informed the customer care on 01/12/2022 about the defect in Laptop and they have sent one technician on 12/12/2022 to the complainant house, after checked the laptop by the technician, he told that it was manufactured about two years ago, it is an old product it cannot be repaired. Then the complainant requested the Op no.1 for replacement of the laptop which was purchased by her personally visit and through phone calls. But Op No.1 did not responded to the complainant properly.
It is worth to note that, despite service of notice to the OP No. 1 to 3 from this Commission for the reasons best known to them OP No.1 to 3 failed to appear before this Commission to answer the claim of the complainant and thereon Op No.1 to 3 are placed as exparte. Under these circumstances we proceed with the matter on the basis of the available evidence on record.
On perusal of the affidavit evidence and the documents placed on record. Document (1) Tax Invoice, that the complainant purchased the above said Laptop on 30/11/2022 for a sum of Rs 61,999.99/- from the Op No.1 showroom. Document No :(2) Legal notice send to the Op by the complainant on 06/02/2023, for that Op No.1 gave untenable reply to the legal notice on 23.02.2023. In the reply notice Op No.1 stated that, he is only distributer, he is not liable for the defect in the product and it is the duty of the customer to contact the company and invoke the guarantee and seek rectification or replacement of the product.
The crux of the matter is that, all the E- mails conversation between complainant and HP company service center it reveals that, the above said Laptop was 2 years old and hence company cannot replace the product only they can repair it.
The Document No: (1) Invoice dated 30/11/2022 it reveals that, the complainant had duly purchased the above said defect Laptop from the OpNo.1. Hence it is the bounden duty of the seller to provide better service to their customers. The OP No.1 should in order to repair it to its worthy condition or when the defect is found within the warranty period. The duty cast on the seller i.e. OP No.1 showroom immediately should attend to the problem up to the satisfaction of the customers but here OP No.1 has completely failed to perform its duty.
The crux of the matter is that, all the E-mails conversation between complainant and HP company service center it reveals that, the complainant registered the complaint, the complaint ID is 5096194939 about defect in the newly purchased Laptop, for that complaint HP service center send their technician and the technician after verified the defective Laptop told that its 2 years old it cannot be repaired. After that the HP service center replay to the complainant that, “its 2 years late sale product kindly check with dealer for DOA and we have evaluated your HP Custer Support Case ID 5096194939 for the issue reported by you. We would like to state that the product can be repaired and doesn’t require a unit replacement. We would request you to share your confirmation to carry out the required repaid. Please revert in case of any queries”.
Document No: 3 it reveals that, on many correspondences made to the OP No. 1 & 2 through E- mails about the defect in the above said Laptop and but Op No.1 neglected the complainant grievances but OP No.2 make at its best attempt for the grievance of the complainant. Hence OP No.2 & 3 are not liable for the deficiency in service. Complainant personally approached the OP No.1 showroom to take back the defective Laptop and replace with new one or refund the amount paid by her but OP No.1 had neglected the complainant and did not give a proper service to its customer. Hence OP No.1 not only committed deficiency in service and his conduct is deplorable one, due to act of OPNo.1 complainant suffered mental agony and lost her faith on the HP Company also.
The complainant has lost his faith on the Op No.1 hence complainant filed this complaint to get new Laptop of same the company or refund the amount paid by her to an extent of Rs 61,999.99/-. Hence, complainant is entitled for the claim as sought in the complaint along with the cost of the proceedings to an extent of Rs. 2,000/-it includes compensation. Accordingly we hold the points No: (1) & (2) are in the Affirmative.
POINT NO. (3):- On the basis of answering the Point No. (1) & (2) and the reasons assigned thereon, we proceed to pass the following.
ORDER
The complaint is hereby allowed with cost.
That the OP No.1 is directed to deliver the New Laptop of the same description with a company’s warrant by receiving back the defective Laptop which was delivered to the complainant or to refund the amount of Rs.61,999.99/-which was paid by the complainant along with interest @ 6% P.a from the date of the payment till its realization within 30 days.
Further OP No.1 is also directed to pay Rs.2,000/- towards the cost of the proceedings.
Send a copy of this order to both the parties at free of cost.
(Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by him, corrected and then pronounced by us on this 21st DAY OF NOVEMBER 2023)
MEMBER PRESIDENT
Consumer Court Lawyer
Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.