DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, PALAKKAD

Dated this the 31^st day of March 2010.

Present : Smt. H. Seena, President

: Smt. Preetha G. Nair, Member

: Smt. Bhanumathi.A.K, Member

C.C.No.138/2007

Satheesh

S/o. Chandran

Residing at Pandamcode

Kollengode

Chathamangalam

Nemmara, Palakkad. - Complainant

(Adv. Jacob Mathew)

Vs

1. The Proprietor

M/s. Computer Gallery

P K M Complex

Near Mission School

Palakkad – 678 014.

(Adv.K.K. Thankappan)

2. The Manager

Cubit - Opposite parties

405 Abhiraj Complex

68 Swastic Society

Navarangapuram

Ahmedabad – 3810 009

Gujarat

O R D E R

By Smt. Preetha.G. Nair, Member

Brief facts of the complaint :

The complainant is a computer student and he has purchased a computer laptop from the 1^st opposite party namely Cubit Lap Top via C3 processor with 256/40GB/CD Drive, internal Modem K.B Mouse Speaker inbuilt for Rs.24,000/- on 26.12.2006. On 6^th July 2007, the computer system was found not functioning and the petitioner has approached the 1^st opposite party in his service address and produced the defective computer and he was directed to come after 2 weeks. But after the stipulated time also , the 1^st opposite party could not repair the defects and the complainant at many times approached the 1^st

- 2 -

opposite party and demanded to rectify the defect or to replace the same with a new one. But that was in vain and the complainant was constrained to approach this Forum for relief.

Hence the complainant is claiming an order directing the opposite parties to replace the defective computer or to return the purchase price of Rs.24,000/- with 12% interest and cost of the proceedings.

2^nd Opposite party was set exparte. 1^st opposite party filed version stating the following contentions. The 1^st opposite party admitted that the complainant purchased a computer Lap Top namely Cubit. The complainant approached the 1^st opposite party with defective computer, but the 1^st opposite party is only a retailer and do not provide any services. So 1^st opposite party directed the complainant to approach the authorized service center of Cubit Computers namely “Online I T Shoppe” at Ernakulam. Further 1^st opposite party stated that “Online I T Shoppe” being the authorized agent were purposefully not made a party and hence this complaint is not maintainable for non-joinder of necessary parties. The 1^st opposite party stated that the firm deals with selling of the materials already produced and does not deal with manufacture or service of any computer. There is absolutely no contact between the complainant and 1^st opposite party. Any claim for the computer or its cost is to be recovered from the 2^nd opposite party alone and the 1^st opposite party is in no way liable for any loss sufferred by the complainant. Hence 1^st opposite prays to dismiss the complaint with the cost of 1^st opposite party.

During the pendency of the proceedings before the forum, 2^nd opposite party has sent a letter dated 11/05/2008 stating that they are ready and willing to repair the defective computer. Also 2^nd opposite party requested the complainant to send the laptop to their authorised service station at Ahamedabad. Upon the request send by the 2^nd opposite party said laptop was send to the head office of the 2^nd opposite party by the complainant.

Ever since the 2^nd opposite party has not repaired or sent it back to the complainant.

The evidence consists of the affidavit filed by the complainant and the 1^st opposite party. Exhibit A1 marked on the side of the complainant.

Issues to be considered are:

• 3 -

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

2. If so, what is the relief and costs?

Issues I & II

We perused relevant documents on record. According to Exhibit A1 the complainant had purchased a Cubit Lap Top from the 1^st opposite party on 26/12/2006 for Rs.24,000/-. During the pendency of the proceedings before the forum the 2^nd opposite party has sent a letter stating that they are ready and willing to repair the defective computer. The complainant stated that he has sent the computer to the 2^nd opposite party and they have duly received it. Further the complainant submitted that the 2^nd opposite party has not repaired and sent it back to him. The complainant has not produced any evidence for this aspect. But 2^nd opposite party was set exparte. Also 2^nd opposite party has sent a letter to the Forum stating that they are ready and willing to repair the defective computer.

The complainant is a computer student and stated that he was not able to use it for even 6 months. Due to the defects in the system of computer Lap Top, he sustained monetary loss and mental agony. It is a settled position that the manufacturer can be made liable only if it is found that there was manufacturing defect in the product. The complainant could not substantiate his case that there was manufacturing defect in the computer laptop manufactured by the 2^nd opposite party. Since it was send to the head office of the 2^nd opposite party. The 2^nd opposite party expresses their willingness to repair the laptop if its send to their office through letter dated 11.05.08. But the 2^nd opposite party has not repaired the computer laptop and send back to the complainant. Also the 2^nd opposite party was not filed version and affidavit.

In such a situation the 1^st and 2^nd opposite parties being the dealers and manufacturers of the computer laptop are liable to compensate the complainant.

In view of the above circumstances we hold the view that there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties. Hence the complaint allowed. We direct the 1^st and 2^nd

- 4 -

opposite parties are jointly and severally liable to pay Rs.24,000/- with 12% interest from the date of purchase of the computer i.e, on 26.12.2006 till the date of order and Rs.2,500/- as cost to the complainant.

Order shall be complied within one month from the date of receipt of order failing which the whole amount shall carry interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of order till realization.

Pronounced in the open court on the 31st day of March 2010

PRESIDENT (SD)

MEMBER (SD)

MEMBER (SD)

APPENDIX

Witness examined on the side of Complainant

Nil

Witness examined on the side of Opposite party

Nil

Exhibits marked on the side of the complainant

1. Ext. A1 – Bill No. 2125 of Computer Gallery

Exhibits marked on the side of the Opposite Party

Nil

Forums Exhibits

Nil

Cost (Allowed)

Rs.2,500/- (Rupees Two thousand Five hundred only)