Chandigarh

StateCommission

A/171/2019

Sh. Shobhit Goel - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Incharge, Lenovo Authorized Service Centre - Opp.Party(s)

J C Kapoor Adv.

18 Dec 2019

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

U.T., CHANDIGARH

 

 

Appeal No.	:	171 of 2019
Date of Institution	:	02.08.2019
Date of Decision	:	18.12.2019

 

Sh. Shobhit Goel (S/o Sh. S. N. Goel) resident of House No.779, Sector 21, Panchkula (Haryana), through his Special Power of Attorney holder Sh. S. N. Goel.    

…..Appellant/Complainant.

Versus

1. The Incharge, Lenovo Authorized Service Centre, (Sysnet Global Technologies (P) Limited, S.C.O. 2461-62, Second Floor, Sector 22-C, Chandigarh – 160022.
2. Sudipto Ghosh (Executive Director – Services, Lenovo India) Lenovo Technical Support, Bangalore (Registered Office), Lenovo India Pvt. Ltd., Ferns Icon, Level 2, Doodenakund Village, Marathhalli, Outer Ring Road, Marathhalli Post, Kr Puram Hobli, Bangalore –    560037.

…Respondents/Opposite Parties.

Appeal under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

 

BEFORE:   JUSTICE RAJ SHEKHAR ATTRI (RETD.), PRESIDENT.

                MRS. PADMA PANDEY, MEMBER.

                MR. RAJESH K. ARYA, MEMBER.

 

Argued by:

 

Sh. J. C. Kapoor, Advocate for the appellant.

Sh. Ashim Aggarwal, Advocate for the respondents.

 

PER  RAJESH  K.  ARYA, MEMBER

                   This appeal has been filed by the complainant against order dated 06.06.2019 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-II, U.T., Chandigarh (in short ‘the Forum’), vide which, consumer complaint bearing No.313 of 2018 filed by him was dismissed by the said Forum.

2.                It is not in dispute that the appellant/complainant purchased Lenovo Laptop from opposite party no.1 (respondent No.1 herein) on 02.05.2015 by spending an amount of Rs.40,989/-. The said laptop was covered under warranty period of one year i.e. up-to 01.05.2016. The complainant also availed extended warranty on said Laptop up-to 01.05.2018 after paying additional amount of Rs.1,499/-. Opposite Party No.1 was proceeded against exparte by the Forum vide order dated 20.08.2018 as it failed to appear despite service of notice. However, opposite party No.2 (respondent No.2 herein) contested the complaint. In its reply, opposite party No.2 pleaded that all the spare parts and repairs were done within the warranty period and there was no inherent manufacturing defect in the said laptop.

3.                The Forum dismissed the complaint of the complainant by making following observations in Para 9 of its order as under:-

“9]       The electronic devices are prone to various technical problems. The Laptop in question reported with problem for the first time after nearly one year of its purchase and the same cannot be construed to be having any manufacturing defect as the same was attended to and got repaired to the satisfaction of the complainant. The warranty means liability of the manufacturer/service centre to attend to the repairs, whatsoever may occur due to its usage.  The Opposite Parties have honoured their commitment and had repaired the Laptop in question without any lapse or reservation on their part. The complainant has failed to substantiate his allegations of manufacturing defect in the Laptop. Therefore, no deficiency in service in made out against the Opposite Parties.”

4.                It was the argument of the Counsel for the appellant/ complainant that the laptop, in question, started defects in the very first year of tis purchase for which two complaints were made on 25.04.2016 and 06.05.2016 to the respondents/opposite parties. However, those issues could not be solved and rectified completely. He further submitted that again a complaint was made on 19.08.2017 qua touch pad failure. Similarly on 29.11.2017, a complaint with regard to boot failure was lodged and opposite party no.1 acknowledged hard disk failure. Counsel further submitted that screen flickering problem in the laptop was reported through email dated 15.12.2017 and it was assured that all the issues would be resolved.  He argued that there were multiple issues and problems with the laptop for which, the complainant had to run from pillar to post to get it repaired, which resulted in undue mental agony and physical harassment to the complainant.  It was then argued that the Forum simply ignored the harassment suffered by the complainant and dismissed the complaint stating that there was no manufacturing defect in the laptop in question and the same was repaired under warranty free of charge.

5.             On the other hand, Counsel for the respondents/opposite parties argued that the Forum rightly dismissed the complaint of the appellant/complainant and this appeal also deserves dismissal keeping in view the observations made by the Forum in its order.

6.                No doubt, the laptop, in question, was repaired under warranty and is working properly. This fact stands corroborated from the documents (Exhibits OP-2/2 to OP-2/4) on record. Perusal of these documents reveals that HDD, LCD and its cable were replaced by the opposite parties under warranty and without charging anything from the complainant. However, it is also true that the laptop, in question, within a year of its purchase developed serious defect relating to its Hard Disk (HDD), which is called the vital organ of a computer or a laptop. After the said HDD was replaced, the laptop started giving flickering problem, for which LCD was found faulty and the same was replaced. Thereafter, Fluke ring issue cropped up, for which, the engineer of the opposite parties replaced the faulty LCD cable. No doubt, the electronic devices are prone to various technical problems, as observed by the Forum but no one can expect such technical problems and that too, one after the other, with a new laptop within a year of its purchase. A consumer (complainant herein), who spent huge amount of Rs.40,989/- on a laptop, would also expect defect free and high performance from it. One could imagine the plight of the complainant, who was made to run again and again to the repair center for getting his new laptop repaired within a year of its purchase. Every single hard earned penny has its value. Merely because the defective parts were replaced under warranty free of charge to make the said laptop functional was not enough to satisfy the mental agony and physical harassment suffered by the complainant on account of faulty product.  After such an experience, the complainant would not think of buying any Lenovo product in whole of his life. Rather, he would be much more cautious in dealing with any other company while buying any electronic device, which may not be prone to technical problem so early. Now, when the laptop, in question, has been repaired and made functional to the satisfaction of the complainant, his request for refund of its price cannot be acceded to. However, for mental agony and physical harassment and for loss of time and energy to get it repaired on various occasions, the complainant deserves to be compensated adequately. In our opinion, an amount of Rs.10,000/- if granted as compensation, to the appellant/complainant, would meet the ends of justice.

7.                In view of above, the impugned order passed by the Forum being illegal and arbitrary is liable to be set aside and the complaint filed by the appellant/complainant deserves to be partly allowed.

8.                For the reasons recorded above, the appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated 06.06.2019 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-II, U.T., Chandigarh, dismissing consumer complaint bearing No.313 of 2018, is set aside. Consumer Complaint bearing No.313 of 2018 is partly allowed against the respondents/opposite parties and they are, jointly and severally, directed to pay an amount of Rs.10,000/- as compensation for mental agony and physical harassment and Rs.5,000/- as costs of litigation to the appellant/complainant, within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order, failing which, the aforesaid amounts shall carry interest @9% per annum, from the date of filing the complaint till actual realization.

9.                Certified Copies of this order be sent to the parties, free of charge.

10.              The file be consigned to Record Room, after completion.

Pronounced                                                                                          

18.12.2019.

[RAJ SHEKHAR ATTRI]

PRESIDENT

 

 

 

 

 

(PADMA PANDEY)

        MEMBER

 

 

(RAJESH  K. ARYA)

MEMBER

Ad