Orissa

Sambalpur

CC/33/2018

Rajesh Kumar Pothal - Complainant(s)

Versus

1-Lenevo India Pvt. Ltd., Registered Office - Opp.Party(s)

P.S.N.Reddy, D.Thakur Ad associates

24 Aug 2022

ORDER

PRESIDENT, DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SAMBALPUR

Consumer Case No- 33/2018

Present-Dr. Ramakanta Satapathy, President,

  Sri. Sadananda Tripathy, Member,

Mr. Rajesh Kumar Pothal,

S/O-Late Dr. Bhikari Charan Pothal,

Back of Astha Nurshing Home,

House of Mr. S. Mishra, Budhraja

Samblapur-768004        .                                               ………..…..Complainant

 

Vrs.

1. Lenevo India Pvt. Ltd., Registered Office

Ferns Icon, Level-2 Doddenakund Village,

Marathhalli Outer Ring Road, Marathhalli

Post, Kr Puram Hobli, Bangalore-560037

2. Lenovo India Pvt, Ltd. , Zonal Office

Apeejay Business Centre, Apeejay House,

Block A, 8th Floor 15 PArk Street,

•  

3. Renovision Automation Services Pvt. Ltd., Wipro, (Service Provider)

Plot No.537, Saheed Nagar, Behind SBI Market Branch, Bhubaneswar.

4. Wipro Renovision Automation Services Pvt. Ltd, (Local Service Provider)

C/o-Shreetech Solution , Near SBI Budharaja,

Fatak, Samablpur-768004..………..Opp. Parties

Counsels:-

1. For the Complainant                   :-Sri. P.S.N. Reddy, Advocate & Associates
2. For the O.P.No.1 & 2                   :- Sri. S.S.Panda, Advocate & Associates
3. For the O.P. No.3 & 4                 :-None

 

               DATE OF HEARING :XXXXXXXX, DATE OF JUDGEMENT : 24.08.2022

           Presented by Sri. Sadanada Tripathy, MEMBER,

1. The Brief fact of the Complainant is that the Complainant has purchased a Lenovo laptop model no. Flex 2-14 vide serial no. S/N- WB 15773051 0n 07/06/2015 at Rs. 43,609/- and the warranty was extended through Lenovo online site up to 06/06/2018 by paying Rs. 1998/-. On dtd. 21/12/2018, the Complainant found some graphics issue in this laptop. As it is in warranty, the Complainant lodged a complaint through on company’s customer care number 1800-300-05366 and the complaint number was 231432200. After verification of the issue by the company’s service experts, the issue was registered as service repair. No. 8010780076 on 23.02.2018 for repairing and on 28.03.2018 the order was established for replacement of motherboard with an order no. 7008536388 accordingly the motherboard was replaced on 09.03.2018 with a repaired/Refurbished motherboard.  After that replacement a new issue was found that the audio jack was not working. Which was again lodged on 22.03.2018 and this issue was linked to the previous Service Repair no. 8010921995 and was established for replacement of motherboard with a order no. 7008586450 on 29.03.2018. But the said service order number was cancelled from the company side on 09.04.2018 without any reason and a new order was created on same date as 7008601951. On 13.04.2018 the local company’s engineer was visited with a motherboard for replacement but the same was found mismatch with this laptop and that was returned back with a new service order vide 7008610403 and was attempt to replace on 24.04.2018 by the local company’s engineer. But after replacing the same was found defective as the laptop was not switched on. So it was returned again. After this all the service order was closed on 25.04.2018 with a status “issue was resolved” and then no other service order was created further and nobody from the company’s customer care was unable to narrate about the status of the warranty claim. On 28.04.2018 again the local company engineer has come with another motherboard and the same thing was happened again as the motherboard is mismatch with this laptop. So that was returned again. The complainant has contact the company’s personals for resolving the issue several time to through unlimited phone calls & email on dtd. 5^th, 17^th and 19^th April, 2018 but there are no favourable response. 
2. The written statement of O.Ps is that the O.Ps denied all the allegations and contentions raised by the Complainant in the complaint. According to O.Ps version as per the terms of the warranty, in the first instance the Laptop is only required to be repaired. It is only when the repair is not possible that may be replaced with one that is at least functionally equivalent. It is reiterated that the authorized Service Centre of the Answering Opposite party has rectified the problem by carrying out the replacement of Motherboard free of cost under warranty when the same was brought to the service centre and as such the Complainant is not entitled to either the replacement with a new one or the refund towards the cost of the Laptop. The fact that the replacement has been carried out free of cost under warranty and that the Complainant is still demanding a refund towards the cost of the Laptop is unwarranted. As per the version of O.Ps the Lenovo Limited Warranty states that “If your Service Provider determines that it is unable to either repair or replace your product your Service Provider will replace it with one that is functionally equivalent.

If the Service Provider determines that it is unable to either repair or replace your product, your sole remedy is to return your product to your place of purchase or to Lenovo for a refund of your purchase price”.

Here in the instance case, when the Service Provider of the Answering Opposite Party has duly attended the complaint of the Complainant by diagnosing the laptop and carrying out the replacement of the Motherboard for free of cost under warranty and hence there is no question of either the replacement with a new Laptop or any refund towards the cost of the Laptop. A field Service Engineer went on an onsite service to the Complainant’s address and found that the keyboard backlit connector in the motherboard was not available, hence the replacement of Motherboard could not be carried out however, and the WLAN and Audio jack issue that were reported were resolved. All allegations of negligence, deficiency of service, and unfair trade practice have been effectively refuted and all allegations made by the Complainant are in bad faith and hold no water.

ISSUES

1. Is the Complainant is the consumer of the O.Ps?
2. Is there any deficiency of service in part of O.Ps?
3. Whether the Complainant is entitled for getting any relief?

Issue No. 1Is the Complainant is the consumer of the O.Ps?

The Complainant has purchased a Lenovo laptop model no. Flex 2-14 vide serial no. S/N- WB 15773051 0n 07.06.2015 at Rs. 43,609/- from the O.Ps and the warranty was extended through Lenovo online site up to 06.06.2018 by paying Rs. 1998/-. Hence he is the consumer of the O.Ps.

Issue No. 2 Is there any deficiency in service in part of O.Ps?

The O.Ps could not repair/replace the Laptop or did not take further any step to solve the problem. Hence the O.Ps are deficient in service.

Issue No. 3 Whether the Complainant is entitled for getting any relief?

From the facts of both the parties, the Complainant is entitled for getting reliefs what he claims in his complaint petition.

                             ORDER

It is directed to the O.Ps to pay an amount of Rs. 43,609/- towards cost of the Laptop, Rs. 50,000/- towards physical strain and mental agony suffered by the Complainant as compensation and Rs. 5,000/- towards cost of the petition to the Complainant within 30 days from the date of order, failing which the amount will carry with 9% interest per annum till realization to the complainant.

Order pronounced in the open Court today on 24th day of Aug, 2022.

Free copies of this order to the parties are supplied.