Haryana

Sonipat

CC/201/2015

SUNIL PAL - Complainant(s)

Versus

THE MANAGER SONIPAT SERVICE SONY AUTHORISED SERVICE CENTRE - Opp.Party(s)

26 Feb 2016

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SONEPAT.

 

Complaint No.201 of 2015                             Instituted on:16.06.2015

                                Date of order:29.02.2016

 

 

Sunil Pal H.No.44/7, Mohan Nagar, Rohtak road, Sonepat.

 

                                      ..Complainant.

 

                   Versus

 

1.The Manager, Sonepat Service, Sony Authorized Service Centre, Shop no.1, Basement Tulip Mall, Gandhi Chowk, Sonepat.

2.The Managing Director, Sony India Pvt. Ltd., A-31, Mohan Co-op. Ind. Est. Mathura road, New Delhi-44.

3.The Managing Director, Eretail, Plot no.60, SP road, Paigah Colony, Behind Anand Threatre, Secunderabad-500003.

4.The Managing Director, Flipkart Internet Pvt. Ltd, Vaishnavi Summit, Ground Floor, 7thj main, 80 fete road, 3^rd block, Koramangala Industrial Layout, Banglore-560034.

                                           ..Respondents.

 

COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 12 OF

THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,1986

 

BEFORE-    NAGENDER SINGH-PRESIDENT.

PRABHA DEVI-MEMBER.

D.V. RATHI-MEMBER.

 

Argued by: Complainant in person.

 

           Sh. Mannu Malik, Adv. for respondents no.1,2 and 4.

           Respondent no.3 given up.

 

O R D E R

 

          The present complaint has been filed by the complainant against the respondents alleging therein that on 16.7.2014 he has purchased Sony Vaio Laptop from respondent no.3 through respondent no.4 for Rs.29890/-.  But the said laptop was defective from the very beginning as the processing of the laptop was very slow.  He has approached the respondents for the removal of the defects, but of no use.  He has sent a letter dated 21.3.2015 to the respondents but he has not received any reply to this letter from the respondents and due to this wrongful act of the respondents, he has suffered unnecessary mental agony and harassment. So, he has come to this Forum and has filed the present complaint.

2.        The respondents no.1,2 and 4 have appeared and filed their reply, whereas respondent no.3 was given-up by the complainant.

          The respondents in their reply has submitted that there is no manufacturing defect in the product. All the allegations leveled against them are totally wrong and false. The respondent no.2 is a hardware manufacturer and is not responsible for the software of the laptop.    The respondents have offered a refund or replacement to the complainant, but the complainant has refused to accept either.  The respondent are ready and willing to provide the complainant the refund, but he has refused to accept the same.

3.        We have heard the arguments advanced by both the learned counsel for the parties at length and have also gone through the entire relevant record placed on the case file very carefully.  We have also perused the written arguments submitted on behalf of respondent no.4 Flipkart and respondent no.1 and 2.

4.        In the present case, the complainant has alleged that the laptop provided to him by the respondents are defective from the very beginning.  His grievances were not even redressed by the respondents  when the complainant has approached them. So, the complainant has filed the present complaint seeking refund of the amount of Rs.29890/-.

          In the written statement, the respondents have admitted that they have offered a refund or replacement of the laptop to the complainant, but the complainant has refused to accept either.  The respondent are ready and willing to provide the complainant the refund, but he has refused to accept the same.

          So, taking into consideration the above said admission of the respondents no.1,2 and 4, we hereby direct the respondents no.1,2 and 4 to refund the amount of Rs.29890/- to the complainant within a period of one month from the date of passing of this order, failing which, the above said amount shall fetch interest at the rate of 09% per annum from the date of passing of this order till realization. The above respondents are further directed to compensate the complainant to the tune of Rs.3000/- (Rs.three thousand) for rendering deficient services, harassment and under the head of litigation expenses.

          With these observations, findings and directions, the present complaint stands allowed qua respondents no.1,2 and 4.

          Certified copy of this order be provided to both the parties free of costs.

              File be consigned after due compliance.

 

(Prabha Wati) (D.V.Rathi)           (Nagender Singh)           

Member,DCDRF, Member, DCDRF,          President, DCDRF

Sonepat.      Sonepat.                Sonepat.

 

Announced 29.02.2016