IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ALAPPUZHA
Friday the 30th day of April, 2010
Filed on 03.08.09
Present
- Sri. Jimmy Korah (President)
- Sri. K. Anirudhan (Member)
- Smt. Shajitha Beevi (Member)
in
C.C.No.264/09
between
Complainant:- Opposite Parties:-
Smt.Babitha Salim, 1. The Manager,
D/o Salim, Compaq Computers Asia 92,
Ponnu Manzil, Industrial Suburb II Stage, Yeshwanthpur,
Mukkavalackal, Bangalore-560022.
Allappuzha.
2. The Manager, Focus Computers,
Raiban Shopping Complex,
Medical College Hospital Junction, Alappuzha.
O R D E R
SRI.K.ANIRUDHAN (MEMBER)
Babitha Salim, D/o Salim has filed this complaint before the Forum on 03.08.2009 alleging deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. The allegations are as follows: She is the student of MBA and for her educational purpose, she had purchased a Laptop of Compaq C 700 from the second opposite party, for an amount of Rs.30,700/- vide Invoice No.D287 dated, 02.08.2008. She had taken a Bank Loan from SBT, Alappuzha Main Branch for the purchase of the said set. It is alleged that she is unable to use the Laptop for her educational purpose because of the frequent trouble especially in the Mother Board and its supporting instruments in the Laptop. Inorder to rectify the defects of the set she had taken the set to the Service Centre, located about 65kms away from Alappuzha and even then she is unable to use the computers for her studies in time. Again she had entrusted the set for repair at its servicing centre of Ernakulam, and so far, they have not rectified the defects and retained the same. It is further alleged that it is very difficult to use the Laptop if the Mother Board complaint occurs in frequent interval, and that she had spent Rs.6,000/- for taking another Laptop by rent for her study purpose, and traveling purpose. So far she had not obtained any relief from the opposite parties. Hence this complaint.
1. Notices were issued to the opposite parties. Second opposite party entered appearance before this Forum and submitted that the matter will be settled. But they have not turned up later. First opposite party absent and expartie. The second opposite party have not filed any version.
2. Considering the strong allegation of the complainant this Forum has raised the following issues for consideration.
1. Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties?
2. Whether the complainant is entitled to get the relief as prayed for?
3. Compensation and costs?
Issues 1 to 3
3. Complainant have filed proof affidavit in support of her case and produced one document in evidence – Ext.A1 – marked- Ext.A1 is the Purchase Bill vide No.D287 dated, 02.08.2008. It shows that the the total price of the set as Rs,30,700/-(Rupees thirty thousand seven hundred only). It further shows that for warranty service, they directed the complainant to contact the Authorised Service Centers of Respective Brands. The Purchase Bill was given by the first opposite party and issued to the complainant, after accepting the full amount. We have perused the details of this matter and verified the document produced by the complainant in evidence and heared the matter in detail.
4. The complainant had purchased the Compaq Laptop with Compaq carry case from the 2nd opposite party, for a sum of Rs.30,700/- on 02.08.2008 for the study purpose of MBA Course. She had obtained the said amount for the purchase of the set was from the Bank Loan of SBT, Alappuzha Main Branch. But, she could not use the said set due to the frequent trouble especially in the Mother Board and its supporting instruments in the Laptop. She had contacted the opposite party and as per their instructions, she had entrusted the set to the service centre of opposite parties. So far, they have not returned the set after rectification of the set. In short she is unable to use the set for her study purpose. In addition to this, she has spent a lot of money for taken a set for rent and spent amount for traveling purpose to the service centers.
4. It is alleged that she had not obtained any relief from the first opposite party. In the beginning stage of the adjudication the first opposite party has agreed to settle the matter. But later, they have evaded from the assurance. The entire action of the opposite parties shows their unfair trade practice. There is grossest deficiency in service culpable negligence and cheating on the side of the second opposite party by way of willful refusal to rectify the defects of set permanently, since the defects are occurred within the warranty period. The 2nd opposite party has not shown any sincere attempt to give a new set to the complainant since the purchased set has manufacturing defects. The whole aspects of this matter shows the unfair dealings of the second opposite party and it further shows their irresponsible attitude towards a bonafide purchaser. Since there was grossest deficiency in service, culpable negligence, and unfair trade practice of the opposite parties, due to their absence of the earnest effort to give a new set and negligence to rectify the defects of the set in time, we are of the view that the allegations put forward by the complainant against the opposite parties are to be treated as genuine and the complaint is to be allowed as prayed for. All the issues are found infavour of the complainant.
5. In the result we hereby direct the second opposite party to return the price of the laptop set ie., Rs.30,700/- (Rupees thirty thousand seven hundred only) to the complainant, after taking back the defective Laptop set from the complainant and pay the 12% interest for the above said amount of Rs.30,700/- (Rupees thirty thousand seven hundred only) from the date of purchase of the set ie, 02.08.2008, till the date of payment of the amount, and pay an amount of Rs6,000/- (Rupees six thousand only) to the complainant as rent for the period non-use of the Laptop, and for her traveling expenses to the service centers of the opposite parties, and further pay an amount of Rs.5,000/-(Rupees five thousand only) as compensation for her mental agony pain, inconvenience, loss of study and physical strain due to the grossest deficiency in service, culpable negligence and unfair trade practice of opposite parties by way of willful refusal to give a new set instead of the defective set and dereliction of duty in rectify the defects of the set in time, and pay an amount of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees two thousand only) as cost of this proceedings.
We further direct the second opposite party to comply with this order within 20 days from the date of the receipt of this order.
Pronounced in open Forum on this the 30th day of April, 2010.
Sd/-Sri. K. Anirudhan
Sd/-Sri. Jimmy Korah
Sd/-Smt. N. Shajitha Beevi
Appendix:-
Evidence of the complainant:-
Ext. A1 - The copy of the Bill No.D287 dated, 02.08.2008
Evidence of the opposite parties:- Nil
// True Copy //
By Order
Senior Superintendent
To
Complainant/Opposite Parties/S.F.
Typed by:- k.x/-
Compared by:-
