THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KOZHIKODE.

C.C.444/2015

Dated this the 25^th  day of October, 2016

(Smt. Rose Jose, B.Sc, LLB.              :  President)

                                                                       Smt.Beena Joseph, M.A                     :  Member

                                                                      Sri. Joseph Mathew, M.A., L.L.B.       :  Member

ORDER

Present: Joseph Mathew, Member:

            This petition is filed under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

            Petitioner’s case is that, her father purchased a Desk Top computer from the 2^nd opposite party manufactured by the 1^st opposite party on 01/10/2013 for Rs.27,700/-  for her personal use. It is stated by the petitioner that on 19/02/2015, the computer started complaint in its display. When complaint at their customer care, the Service Engineer came and replaced its mother board and key board on 20/02/2015. But after 5 months the same complaint repeated and on request the service engineer came and replaced its mother board again on 28/07/2015. Making her disappointed, the same complaint again repeated on the very next day itself and it was informed at the service centre, Kozhikode. They promised to send their service personnel but till date nobody came and the computer is still lying idle. The recurring complaint with the computer defeated the purpose of its purchase itself and this caused much mental agony, loss of time and heavy financial loss to her.

            It is alleged by the petitioner that the repeated complaint with regard to the computer is because of its manufacturing defect and the indifferent attitude of the opposite parties in repairing or replacing the same amounts to unfair trade practice and also deficiency in service on their part. Hence this petition is filed to direct the opposite parties either to replace the defective computer with a defect free new one or to return its purchase price along with compensation for her sufferings and cost of the proceedings to her.

            After receiving notice from this Forum the 2^nd and 3^rd opposite parties appeared. The 1^st opposite party didn’t appear. None of them filed any version and hence they set ex-parte.

            Petitioner filed affidavit and produced 3 numbers of documents to prove her case. These are marked as Ext. A1 to A3.

            Ext. A1 is the copy of invoice dated 01/10/2013 issued by the 2^nd opposite party for Rs.27,700/-. Ext. A2 and A3 are the copies of customer call feedback report issued by the 3^rd opposite party for the replacement of mother board and keyboard of the computer respectively. Ext. A2 and A3 proved the case of the petitioner that the computer was defective and its mother board and keyboard were replaced twice within a short period of its purchase. The opposite parties didn’t file version or challenged the averments of the petitioner or the veracity of the documents produced and hence the averments of the petitioner stands unchallenged and proved.

            Considering the facts and relying on the documents produced by the petitioner, we are also of the view that the said act of the opposite parties amounts to deficiency in service on their part.

            In the result the following order is passed.

            The opposite parties No. 1 and 2 are jointly and severally ordered to return Rs.27,700/- (Rupees twenty seven thousand seven hundred only) ie the purchase price of the computer and to pay Rs.2,000/- (Rupees two thousand only) as compensation for the difficulties suffered by the petitioner and Rs.500/- (Rupees five hundred only) as cost of the proceedings to the petitioner within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order. Failing which the amount will carries 9% interest per annum from the date of the order till payment. The opposite party can take back the defective computer from the petitioner on payment.             

Dated this the 25^th day of  October, 2016

Date of filing: 22/08/2015

SD/-MEMBER                             SD/-  PRESIDENT                      SD/- MEMBER

APPENDIX

Documents exhibited for the complainant:

A1. Copy of retail invoice issued by 2^nd opposite party

A2. Copy of Customer feedback report issued by 3^rd opposite party

A3. Copy of Customer feedback report issued by 3^rd opposite party

Documents exhibited for the opposite party:

Nil

Witness examined for the complainant:

None

Witness examined for the opposite party:

None                                                                          

Sd/-President

//True copy//

(Forwarded/By Order)

SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT