By. Sri Chandran Alachery, Member:

The complaint is filed under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act for an Order directing the opposite parties to replace the laptop issued by opposite party No.2 or to repay an amount of Rs.54,375/- being the value of laptop with 12% interest from the date of filing of complaint till realization also to pay Rs.3,00,000/- as compensation.

2. Brief of the complaint:- The complainant purchased a HP laptop from opposite party No.2 on 17.09.2011 for a sum of Rs.54,375/- with one year warranty. It was purchased for study purpose of complaint. The laptop became defective and useless due to mechanical complaint and complainant approached opposite party No.3 being the authorized service centre of laptop for service. The Service Engineer on 29.09.2012 visited the place of complainant and took custody of laptop. After one month, on 31.10.2012, the Service Engineer delivered the laptop after rectification. The Service Engineer assured that laptop is in perfect condition. But when checked, it is found that some parts are replaced with low quality parts. The display, motherboard etc are replaced with cheaper quality parts. The complainant noticed this fact and refused to accept the laptop. The complainant demanded to replace the laptop with a new one. But opposite party No.2 refused to do it and promised again to rectify the defect. On 08.12.2012, the service centre delivered the rectified laptop. It was working for 2 days again problems arised. Then opposite party No.3 took custody of laptop on 13.12.2012. So far not returned the laptop serviced. Aggrieved by this, the complaint is filed.

3. On receipt of complaint, notices were issued to opposite parties and opposite party No.1 and 2 not appeared before the Forum and opposite party No.1 and 4 were set ex-parte. Opposite party No.2 and 3 appeared and filed version. In the version of opposite party No.2, they admitted the purchase of laptop by the complainant. The laptop is having one year onsite warranty from HP. Defect of laptop in August 2012 is not known to opposite party No.2. The delivery of cheapest quality parts by replacing original parts is not known to opposite party No.2. The intention of complainant is that to replace the laptop with a new generation one by mis-using the process of law. The complainant is trying to get a new laptop after two years intensive use of the laptop with illegal enrichment. There is no deficiency of service from the part of opposite party No.2.

4. In the version, opposite party No.3 denied all the allegation contained in the complaint except those admitted. The allegation are baseless, No manufacturing defect of laptop is proved by Expert opinion. Where a complainant alleges defects in goods, which cannot be determined without proper analysis. (Honorable National Commission in K. L. Aroro V/s Groovy Communications 2002 3CPF 92 NC). In this case, the laptop had base warranty from 23.05.2011 to 21.07.2012. The complainant purchased the laptop on 18.09.2010 and had used for one year which proves that the laptop had no manufacturing defect. Opposite party No.3 states that the repairs of the laptop is done and now it is working fine, but the complainant refused to take delivery but demands for a replacement. There is no deficiency of service or unfair trade practice from the side of opposite party No.3.

5. On perusal of complaint, version and documents the Forum raised the following points for consideration:-

1. Whether there is any deficiency of service from the part of opposite parties?

2. Relief and Cost.

6. Point No.1:- The complainant filed proof affidavit and is examined as PW1 and documents are marked as Ext.A1 to A11. Opposite party No.2 filed proof affidavit and is examined as OPW1. Opposite party No.3 submitted that no oral evidence from opposite party No.3. Ext.A1 is the Purchase Invoice, Ext.A2, A3, A4 and A5 are the service call report. Wherein complaint is reported. In Ext.A2, A3, A4 and A5 series call reports, the name of service centre is shown as “Maha Electronics Private Limited, Shop No.16/926-L, 2^nd Floor, Sunlight Tower, Kallai road, Chalappuram, Calicut”. The complainant in proof affidavit stated that the opposite party No.4's representative came and took custody of laptop and it is still with opposite party No.4. The case of complainant is that the opposite party No.1 directed the complainant to handover the laptop to opposite party No.4 and opposite party No.4 is the authorized service centre of opposite party No.3 company. The complainant stated that the complainant on several occasions contacted the opposite party No.4, but they did not rectify the defect and hand over the laptop to the complainant. During trial, the complainant filed I.A.117/2015 praying for a direction to the opposite party No.4 to produce the laptop before the Forum. The Forum after hearing the petition, the petition is allowed and the opposite party No.4 is directed to produce the laptop before the Forum and said order is send to opposite party No.4 through registered post. It was returned on 13.04.2015 stating that the opposite party No.4 “left”. The laptop was entrusted to opposite party No.4 as per the direction of opposite party No.1. Opposite party No.1 and 4 are ex-parte in this case. On analyzing the entire evidences, the Forum found that there is no manufacturing defect is proved to the laptop. Opposite party No.2 is the Sales points and opposite party No.3 is the manufacturing company. Opposite party No.3 not denied the averment that opposite party No.4 is the service centre of opposite party No.3. But since no manufacturing defect is proved, opposite party No.3 cannot be held liable for the replacement or to pay the price of laptop to the complainant. But here, opposite party No.1 and 4 are the service centres of opposite party No.3. Opposite party No.1 and 4 did not appear before the Forum and produced the laptop even if direction is there. It is evident as per Ext.A5 that the opposite party No.4 had taken custody of the laptop for repair on 13.12.2012. Ext.A5 is issued to the complainant by opposite party No.4. So opposite party No.4 is liable to produce the laptop before the Forum. But opposite party No.4 failed to produce it. It is up to the opposite party No.4 to deny or admit the allegation of the complainant. If opposite party No.4 produce the laptop before the Forum, it would have been easy for the complainant to prove the defects. But that is not happened. Therefore, by analyzing the entire evidences and documents, the Forum found that there is sheer negligence and deficiency of service from the part of opposite party No.1 and 4 in dealing the matter. Point No.1 is found accordingly.

7. Point No.2:- Since the Point No.1 is found in favour of complainant, he is entitled to get cost and compensation.

In the result, the complaint is partly allowed and the opposite party No.1 and 4 are directed to pay Rs.54,375/- (Rupees Fifty Four Thousand Three Hundred and Seventy Five) to the complainant being the value of laptop and also to pay Rs.2,000/- (Rupees Two Thousand)as compensation and Rs.1,000/- (Rupees One Thousand) as cost of the proceedings. The opposite party No.1 and 4 are jointly and severally liable to pay the above amounts within 30 days from the date of receipt of this Order, failing which the complainant is entitled to get 12% interest for the whole sum.

Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by him and corrected by me and Pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 31^st day of August 2015.

Date of Filing: 24.06.2014.

PRESIDENT :Sd/-

MEMBER :Sd/-

MEMBER :Sd/-

/True Copy/

Sd/-

PRESIDENT, CDRF, WAYANAD.

APPENDIX.

Witness for the complainant:-

PW1. Akhil. Complainant.

Witness for the Opposite Parties:-

OPW1. Saheer. Computer Shop.

Exhibits for the complainant:

A1. Cash Bill. Dt:17.09.2011.

A2. Service Call Report. Dt:29.09.2012.

A3. Service Call Report. Dt:31.10.2012.

A4. Service Call Report. Dt:08.12.2012.

A5. Service Call Report. Dt:13.12.2012.

A6. Email Communication.

A7. Email Communication.

A8. Email Communication.

A9. Email Communication.

A10. Email Communication.

A11. Email Communication.

Exhibits for the opposite parties:-

Nil.

Sd/-

PRESIDENT, CDRF, WAYANAD.

a/-