DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM, EAST, Govt of NCT Delhi
CONVENIENT SHOPPING CENTRE, 1st FLOOR, SAINI ENCLAVE, DELHI 110092
Consumer complaint no. - 1120/2013
Date of Institution – 24/12/2013
Order reserved on- 26/08/2016
Order declared on - 29/08/2016
In matter of
Anand Kumar, adult
S/o – Sh Om Prakash Singh
HN-192/1B, Bholanath Nagar
Shahdara, Delhi -110032……..…………………..………..…………….Complainant
Vs
1-M/s Vijay Sales
H-2, Model Town III,
Mall Road, New Delhi-110009
2-M/s-Sysnet Global Technology Pvt Ltd
W-42, Okhla Industrial Area-Phase III
New Delhi- 110020
3-The Manager
Hewlet Packard India Sales Pvt Ltd
HP Tower, Global Business Park
MG Road, Sikanderpur,
Gurgaon, Haryana, 122002………………………………..…………..Respondents
Complainant - In person
Opponent 1&2 Advocate - PV Dinesh, Sindhu TP & others
Quorum- Sh Sukhdev Singh- President
Dr P N Tiwari - Member
Mrs Harpreet Kaur- Member
Order by Dr P N Tiwari, Member
Brief Facts of the case
This case was instituted on 24rth Dec, 2013 and due to ongoing renovation of Forum’s structure, delay occurred from Aug 2014 to Mar 2015.
The complainant purchased a Dell Laptop from OP1 for a sum of Rs 24,000/- vide invoice no. 77DMT1013SICD 38 on dated 02/01/2013. He had submitted two bills of OP1 as one of HP Laptop of 24,000/ -and other of Rs 990/- for some computer accessories, pen drive and one sound bar notebook. He had also annexed four service /job sheets of OP2 from dated 12/09/2013, 21/11/2013, 23/11/2013 and 11/12/2013. Another job card dated 2/12/2013 was under different name submitted. All the job cards showed that product was under warranty.
The said product developed some problem in Nov 2013 as Restart Issue –Blue Dump Error and said laptop was taken to authorized service centre, OP2, on 21/11/2013 vide report no 4715999603-473. As per the complainant, the said laptop was lying with him. He had alleged defective services by OPs and had suffered harassment and mental agony and had under gone depression. So he filed this complaint against OPs and claimed for refund of the cost of Laptop Rs 24,000/- with compensation Rs 40,000/- and litigation charges Rs 10,000/-
After scrutinizing the complaint and annexures filed, notices were served. OP 1 and 3 put their appearance as seller and manufacturer of product. OP 2 was an authorized service centre of OP3, hence, would be represented for it.
OP1 denied all the allegations of complainant like defective product was sold and no services were provided. It was also submitted that the product had been manufactured by OP3, so they would provide the services as per their terms and conditions. OP1 was only a dealer of OP3. OP3 submitted that they had never denied offering service to complainant as the said product developed defect like ‘Blue dump” issue, which occured due to pirated use of software.
OP3 also submitted that complainant had been given three services and the complaint was resolved. In all the job sheets, complainant was satisfied and had put his signatures too. But when he brought the product/laptop, with same problem, OP3 replaced mother board as SO no. 6142955061 having part no. 699811-001, MBD was removed and new one was installed with remark as the part was defective. This job card was dated 11/12/2013.
OP3 also submitted that such problem occur when product was not handled properly or use of pirated software. In such condition, working of their sophisticated electronic product would develop problems. As complainant had filed his complaint after satisfactory service given on 11/12/2013 and since then complainant had not reported any problem, but he had filed this complaint with ulterior motive.
Evidences on affidavit from both the parties were filed and were on record. Both the parties controverted their allegations. Arguments were heard from both the parties. Order was reserved.
We scrutinized all the facts of the complainant and evidences of parties which were on record, it was clear that complainant had taken services from OP2 and problem was resolved too. But on 11/12/2013, the mother board was also replaced. Thereafter no complaint was reported by complainant.
Prior to development of problem, he used his laptop for more than 10 months without any problem.
We have gone through all the facts and merits of the case and came to the conclusion that this complaint was filed by the complainant much after the defective motherboard was replaced. Since then, there had been no problem brought before us during the pendency of this case. As far as his complaint that he under gone in depression, there had been no evidence from any neurophysician that he was taking anti depressant medicines due to this product. If at all, the same problem would have occurred, he would have brought in the notice of Forum. More so, OP3 had given their services as per the terms and condition of product and even replaced the defective part from the laptop during warranty period. Manufacturer right exits as per terms and condition of the product. If product have manufacturing defect, the product require replacement or refund of the cost of the product. So, by going through the evidences of OPs on record, complainant has failed to prove his allegations.
We came to the conclusion that there is no merit in this complaint and the same deserve to be dismissed. Hence, complaint is dismissed without any cost.
The copy of this order be sent to the parties as per rules and file be consigned to the record room.
Mrs -Harpreet Kaur- Member (Dr) P N Tiwari - Member
Shri Sukhdev Singh - President
