Chandigarh

DF-I

CC/97/2024

MANRAJ SANDHU - Complainant(s)

Versus

UNICORN INFORSOLUTION PVT. LTD - Opp.Party(s)

19 Sep 2024

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION-I,

U.T. CHANDIGARH

 

                    

Consumer Complaint No.	:	CC/97/2024
Date of Institution	:	20/2/2024
Date of Decision	:	19/9/2024

 

Manraj Sandhu S/o Mandeep Singh Sandhu, R/o House No. 1272. Sector 8-C. Chandigarh.

Complainant

Versus

 

1. Unicorn Infosolutions Pvt. Ltd., SCO 315-316, Ground Floor, Sector 35-B, Chandigarh. (Through its authorized signatory).

2 Apple Inc., One Apple Park Way, Cupertino, CA 95014, USA. (Through its authorized signatory)

3.Apple, 19th Floor, Concorde Tower C. UB City, No 24. Vittal Mallya Road, Bangalore-560001, India. (Through its authorized signatory)

Opposite Parties

 

CORAM :	PAWANJIT SINGH	PRESIDENT
	SURJEET KAUR SURESH KUMAR SARDANA	MEMBER MEMBER

                       

ARGUED BY	:	Complainant in person.
	:	None for OP No.1.
	:	OP No.2 exparte
	:	Sh. Manpreet Singh Sawhney, Advocate for OP No.3.

Per SURESH KUMAR SARDANA, Member

     Briefly stated the Complainant had purchased an Apple Macbook Pro 15" (2018) laptop on 16th November, 2018 with upgrades such as 2.6 GHz i7 processor and Radeon 560X graphic card on additional cost from University of Florida Bookstores at a cost of $ 3.215.53. The laptop was covered under 03 years warranty from 16/11/2018 to 15/11/2021. On 20/04/2020, due to some defect the "Logic Board of the same laptop was replaced by Gatortec (Premier Partner of Apple Inc.) located in Gainesville, FL, USA. After the abovementioned service, during September 2020, the laptop device began to cause issues such as sudden shut-downs, crashes and lags which had never happened earlier before the replacement done in April, 2020, without any change in user operations/conditions. These malfunctions occurred randomly, under normal operating conditions, without any warning or concern of physical/internal damage or system overuse. The frequency of these crashes was erratic; with up to 5 times a day. The Complainant then brought back the device to Gatortec in September. 2020 to check the issues with the replacements done in April, 2020. However, Apple Customer service assured the Complainant that these issues were re-occurring regularly with this model and instructed him to upgrade the OS system and keep sending the internal "Crash Reports" to Apple Inc. every time these issues occur and subsequently, OP will be able to keep track of the device. Apple Inc. Customer service assured the customer that with the help of these "Crash reports", if the issues such as shut down, hanging and lagging issues worsen, Apple Inc. will replace the parts without any cost. Thereafter the complainant moved to India being a permanent citizen in November, 2021. In December, 2023, the device ultimately failed to "turn on and the Complainant rushed to O.P. No. 1, its authorized service centre in India le Unicom Infosolutions Pvt. Ltd (O.P. no. 1) and deposited his laptop with it on 14.12.2023 with tracking no, CDG38255112.  The technician of OP No.1 informed the complainant about the faulty Logic Board and gave estimate of Rs.69,000/-. The complainant called India Apple Customer Service to seek assistance to cover the replacement and apple customer care recognized previous replacements and requested details regarding their own service provider and device no.’s Unicorn Infosolutions Pvt. which supplied by the complainant through linkd but despite of that nothing was done by the OPs. and ultimately on 28.12.2023  that the warranty period is over and the cost shall have to be borne by the complainant. Alleging the aforesaid act of Opposite Parties deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on their part, this complaint has been filed.

2. The Opposite Parties NO.1 in its written statement while admitting the factual matrix of the case stated that the complainant visited in service center of answering OP on 14.12.2023 at 06:36 P.M. under job number:- CDG38255112 with the complaint Mac Book not powering on. It is averred that the Laptop checked with known good working power adapter still no power activity on Laptop. Reset SMC and PRAM and reset all internal connector and clean internally then checked again with known good working power adapter but issue same still as laptop not getting power on.  It was found that Main Logic Board faulty and also additional part may be faulty even it was unable to run AST2 test and the same Need to be MLB with Touch Board replacement. The complainant was not agree for further process as MacBook is out of warranty.  It is averred that as per company provisions any material damage caused to the device within warranty period will not be covered under warranty services for free as its Out of Warranty service. Denying all other allegations made in the complaint a prayer  for the dismissal of the complaint has been made.
3. OP No.2 did not turn up despite due service, hence vide order dated 22.4.2024 it was proceeded against exparte.
4. OP No.3 in its reply No.3  stated that that Apple Inc. has not provided any services to the Complainant and neither did the Complainant engage with Apple Inc. regarding any issues related to the subject laptop. It is essential to clarify that the Complainant sought assistance from GatorTech concerning the alleged issues. Consequently, Apple Inc. is not a correct party to the present complaint and cannot be made liable for any liabilities and/or obligation of GatorTech. Further, it is the Complainant's own admission in paragraph 25 of the complaint that the cause of action i.e., the alleged "failure to start up the device has occurred in India only. It is stated that warranty obligor with respect to Apple products in India is Apple India Private Limited/OP3. Any services provided to the consumers with respect to Apple products in India is only through OP3. Therefore, no cause of action, whatsoever, has arisen against Apple Inc. in the present case. Denying any deficiency on its part a prayer for dismissal of the complaint has been made.
5. Rejoinder was filed and averments made in the consumer complaint were reiterated.
6. Contesting parties led evidence by way of affidavits and documents.
7. We have heard the learned counsel for the contesting parties and gone through the record of the case.
8. The main grievance of the complainant is that the laptop purchased by him, started giving problem within warranty period and was not repaired satisfactorily.
9. On perusal of the annexure C-2 & Annexure OP3/2, it is observed that the complainant had approached Gatortech  in Florida, USA on 8.4.2020, regarding some defect in Logic Board due to liquid damage caused by the complainant himself to the laptop in question.
10. The complete service record Annexure OP3/2has been produced by OP No.3, which clearly indicates that most of the internal components of the subject laptop were contacted by liquid (juice spill over) and certain keys of the key board were found to be unresponsive.
11.  In view of the foregoing, we are of the view that since the Gatortech has provided the services to the complainant under Apple Care+ plan with respect to the subject laptop, hence, Gatortech is a proper necessary party to the instant complaint and in the absence of Gatortech no effective order can be passed by this Commission.  Our view is supported with the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case titled as Moreshare Yadaorao Mahajan Vs. Vyankatesh Sitaram Bhedi (D) L.Rs and Ors passed in civil Appeal No. 5755-5756 of 2011 decided on 27.9.2022. The relevant portion of the same is reproduced as under:-

“This Court, in the case of Mumbai International Airport Private Limited (supra), has observed thus:

“15. A “necessary party” is a person who ought to have been joined as a party and in whose absence no effective decree could be passed at all by the court. If a “necessary party” is not impleaded, the suit itself is liable to be dismissed. A “proper party” is a party who, though not a necessary party, is a person whose presence would enable the court to completely, effectively and adequately adjudicate upon all matters in dispute in the suit, though he need not be a person in favour of or against whom the decree is to be made. If a person is not found to be a proper or necessary party, the court has no jurisdiction to implead him, against the wishes of the plaintiff. The fact that a person is likely to secure a right/interest in a suit property, after the suit is decided against the plaintiff, will not make such person a necessary party or a proper party to the suit for specific performance.”

     It could thus be seen that a “necessary party” is a person who ought to have been joined as a party and in whose absence no effective decree could be passed at all by the court. It has been held that if a “necessary party” is not impleaded, the suit itself is liable to be dismissed.”

 

12. Even otherwise the complainant reported the matter on 14.12.2023 with the OPs,  whereas the 3 years warranty for the said laptop had expired  on 15.11.2021. Hence, we are of the view that the OPs were rightfully charging towards the necessary repairs.
13. In view  of the above, we are of the opinion that the complainant  has not been able to prove any deficiency  in service and unfair trade practice on the part of OPs and as such the complaint liable to be dismissed being meritless.
14. In view of the aforesaid discussion, the present consumer complaint, being devoid of any merit, is hereby dismissed leaving the parties to bear their own costs.
15. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stands disposed off
16.     Certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge. The file be consigned

			[Pawanjit Singh]
			President
			[Surjeet Kaur] Member
19/9/2024			[Suresh Kumar Sardana]
mp			Member