By Smt. PREETHI SIVARAMAN.C, MEMBER
1.Case of the complainant:-
On 10/09/2020 complainant had purchased A 315-22 ACER Laptop worth Rs. 25,000/- from opposite party No.1 shop at Manejri. From the beginning itself it was not in a working condition. On the very first use, complainant realised that the working of the battery and the screen of the laptop is not in a functional manner. A white screen appears while switch on the Laptop and the battery backup was also very poor. Complainant could not use the laptop even one day. He was purchased the above laptop for giving to his sister-in -law as a gift.
2. When he contacted the opposite party No.1, they suggested him to do software updation. Complainant is a busy doctor and due to the Covid pandemic duties in hospital it is very difficult for him to go to the shop at Manjeri. Thereafter complainant gave the laptop to opposite party No.1 shop for repair. But the condition of the laptop was in the same manner as how it was in the first time. Thereafter on 30/09/2020 he put a complaint before the complaint portal of opposite party No.1 and he demanded a new laptop. But they denied the conditions put by complainant. Due to the deficiency of service from the opposite parties and manufacturing defect of the laptop, complainant approached opposite party No.1 for more than ten times. Complainant is a doctor by profession and due to the Covid pandemic hectic duties, the act of opposite parties caused mental and physical harassment to complainant. Complainant again stated that the laptop which he bought from opposite party No.1 had the defects like white screen problem , poor battery backup, non working of keys in the keypad, and mouse pad complaint. Due to the software defects and other defects mentioned above, the sister-in-law of complainant had faced problems in the online exam wrote by her. It is clear deficiency of service and unfair trade practice from the side of opposite parties. The laptop bought by complainant from opposite party No.1 shop which was manufactured by opposite party No.2. On the first day of its use it had problem and the laptop got dyfunct. Hence there is clear manufacturing defect for the above laptop. Due to the deficiency of service from the side of opposite parties, the complainant had faced mental agony and hardships. Hence this complaint.
3. Prayer of the complainant is that he is entitled to get Rs.25,000/- as the price of the laptop or he is entitled to get a new laptop , Rs. 1,00,000/-as compensation for the mental agony hardships suffered by complainant due to the act of opposite parties and Rs. 10,000/- as cost of the proceedings.
4. On admission of the complaint notice was issued to the opposite party No.1 and notice served on them and they appeared before the Commission through their counsel and filed version. Thereafter complainant filed an IA 75/2022 to implead the ACER India Private Limited as opposite party No.2. That IA allowed and impleaded them as opposite party No.2 and notice sent to opposite party No.2 and they appeared through their counsel and filed version.
5. In their version, opposite party No.1 admitted that on 10/09/2020 complainant had purchased one laptop from their shop. But the other allegations levelled by complainant against them were denied by them. They stated that within10days of its purchase, complainant approached them for software updation and as per the direction of complainant, they updated the software of complainant’s laptop. Then the next week itself he approached them with a complaint that one of the key in the key board was difficult to press. Then opposite party No.1 called the service centre of Acer company and complainant entrusted the laptop to them for servicing and they returned back the laptop to complainant within three days after service of the laptop. Complainant never put a complaint that there is a white screen found in the laptop. Moreover complainant taken the laptop with good working condition and he never approached this opposite party for changing the laptop. This complaint is not maintainable due to non-joinder of necessary party because the service centre is not a party in the complaint .They again stated that, they are selling the laptop of different brands having worldwide standard. There is no compulsion to the complainant from the opposite party No.1 to pick some special brands of laptop. Complainant can choose and pick any of the laptop of his choice. Moreover before buying the laptop opposite party No.1 will always ready to explain the modus operandi of the laptop which they are selling. The complainant in the above complaint bought the laptop only after understanding the specification and other aspects of the laptop. Hence there is no deficiency of service from their side.
6. In their version opposite party No.2 stated that, they engaged in the manufacture, import and export of various electronic products supporting peripherals and accessories and trading thereof. In this complaint complainant did not issue a legal notice to this opposite parties and in the absence of such legal notice being served , opposite party No.2 was not given an opportunity to verify the factual position of the present matter and as such could not offer an option to the complainant for settling this dispute at pre-litigation stage. Moreover they are willing to bring this dispute to an amicable end. For bringing an expeditious end to the above complaint, as a gesture of goodwill and towards a full and final settlement of the consumer complaint, they are ready to repair the laptop of complainant on free of charge. But that offer was not acceptable to the complainant. Hence the commission may have to decide the matter on merits.
7. In order to substantiate the case of the complainant, he filed an affidavit in lieu of Chief examination and the documents he produced were marked as Ext. A1 to A5. Ext.A1 is the copy of Tax Invoice given by opposite party No.1 to complainant on 10/09/2020, Ext.A2 is the copy of email communication between complainant and opposite parties dated 30/09/2020, Ext.A3 is the copy of email communication between complainant and opposite parties on 30/09/2020 and 02/10/2020, Ext.A4 is the copy of grievance information forwarded by complainant to opposite parties on 19/10/2020, Ext.A5 is the true copy of tax invoice given by opposite party No.1 to complainant on 10/09/2020. Thereafter opposite party No.1 and 2 filed affidavits, but no documents produced.
8. Heard complainant and opposite parties. Perused affidavits and documents. The following points arise for consideration:-
- Whether there is any deficiency of service and unfair trade practice on the part of opposite parties?
- If so, reliefs and cost?
9. Point No.1:-
Case of the complainant is that on 10/09/2020 he had purchased Acer Laptop worth Rs.25,000/- from opposite party No.1 shop. From the beginning itself, it was not working. The battery backup was low and screen of the laptop was not in functional manner. There is a white screen appeared in the laptop while switch on. When he contacted opposite party No.1, he advised to upgrade the software and opposite party No.1 returned back the laptop after repair to complainant. Due to the deficiency of service from the side of opposite parties and manufacturing defect of laptop, complainant suffered a lot.
10. Opposite party No.1 denied all the allegations levelled against them by complainant. They admitted that within 10 days of purchase of laptop, complainant approached them for software updation and as per the direction of complainant they updated the software of complainant’s laptop. Then the next week itself complainant approached them for rectifying keyboard problem and they contacted the authorised service centre of ACER and they repaired the laptop and returned back to complainant within three days. They again contented that complainant never put a complaint regarding white screen and they said that complainant taken back the laptop with good working condition and never approached them for changing the laptop. Opposite party No.2 also stated that complainant did not issue a legal notice to them and they were not aware about the present matter otherwise they will settle the matter in the pre litigation stage itself. They again said that they are ready to repair the laptop on free of charge basis.
11. From the above points, it is clear that there was some problems to the laptop of complainant within few days of its purchase. That laptop was given by opposite party No.1 and manufactured by opposite party No.2. As per the contention of opposite party No.1, complainant given the laptop to them for software updation. Sometimes complainant does not know the modus operandi of laptop especially its software problem etc. Anyhow complainant in his complaint stated that opposite party No.1 directed him to update the software of the new laptop and opposite party No.1 in his version stated that complainant entrusted the laptop with them for software updation. From the above points, we are on the opinion that within few days of purchase of the laptop complainant, entrusted the laptop to opposite party No.1 for software updation. There was a transaction between complainant and opposite party No.1 regarding laptop. It is clear from the above statements of both parties. As per Ext. A1 document, complainant purchase the laptop on 10/09/2020 and as per Ext. A2 document , it is clear that complainant sent a complaint through email to opposite parties regarding the problems like white screen blinking and very poor battery backup. In that complaint, he stated that he contacted the opposite parties immediately and was asked to update the laptop which was fruitless. Then he again stated that “I carried my laptop to your shop and was repaired from there and was in the same condition when I tried to operate. I carried my laptop again and was send to ACER repair shop by you. It was returned to me after 8 days which charger missing and keyboard not working. I informed this and charger was returned but my laptop is still not working even after several days of hurdles”. From the above statements in the emails sent by complainant to opposite parties clearly reveals that there had some problems to the laptop of complainant within few days of its purchase and he had informed this to opposite parties especially Opposite party No.1 at once. From Ext. A2 it is clear that, when it was returned to complainant after 8 days, the charger was missing and keyboard was not working. From the above points we are on the opinion that the newly purchased laptop for gifting to complainant’s sister-in-law was not in a working condition from the beginning itself.
12. In Ext. A3 the email sent by opposite party No.1 to complainant clearly stated that they forwarded the complaint of complainant to concerned department and they assured that they will contact complainant within 48 hours and they said sorry to complainant for the inconvenience caused to him. If opposite party No.1 got a complainant about this laptop, they will surely intimate opposite party No.2 because they are the manufacturers of the above laptop. A complaint aroused within two days of its purchase will be a manufacturing defect. We are unable to understand what is the actual defect of laptop. Opposite party No.1 can easily communicate before the Commission about the actual complaint of the laptop. If they have got a complaint like this they will surely intimate opposite party No.2 about this. But opposite party did not produce documents regarding that.
13. In Ext. A4 dated 19/10/2020, complainant intimated the problem of laptop to opposite party No.1, which was existing at that time also. In that document, he stated that he enquired about the laptop repeatedly to opposite party No.1 during his hectic Covid duties. Complainant is a busy doctor at Government hospital, Manjeri. During the Covid duties, he sent email to opposite party No.1 and they replied that repairing of his new laptop is in process for two weeks. In that email message, he again stated that he want a new laptop in working condition. From the above points, we are on the opinion that complainant suffered a lot due to the non working of laptop in his hectic Covid schedules. Moreover he purchased this laptop for gifting to his sister-in-law. In his complaint he stated that due to the problem of laptop, his sister-in-law was unable to appear the exams properly. During the exam time the laptop got dyfunct and she cannot write the exam in a proper way. It will surely affect the complainant because he had gifted the laptop to her.
14. The opposite party No.2 had approached this matter in a positive way. They stated in their version and affidavit that they did not know about the complaint filed by complainant. They again stated that complainant can sent an email to them for reporting about the complaint. But we are on the opinion that a person who bought a thing from a local shop will always contact them for further queries and for repair etc. Moreover complainant is a busy doctor and during the covid pandemic season we can understand the situation of a busy doctor at that time. Moreover opposite party No.2 stated that they will settle the matter by repairing the laptop of complainant on free of charge basis.
15. Complainant contacted opposite party No.1 within two or three days after purchase of laptop. Both complainant and opposite party No.1 admitted the same, but there are some confusion regarding the actual defect of the laptop. But complainant filed a complaint through complaint portal of opposite party No.1 on 30/09/2020. On 19/10/2020 complainant demanted a new laptop with working condition instead of the old one. Another complaint of complainant was the non working of the key of the keyboard. But it is not clear that the key problem was started after entrusting the laptop to opposite party No.1 or not. Sometime it was happened from opposite party No.1 shop or from the service centre, which is not a party in this complaint. Moreover opposite party No.1 themselves admitted that complainant approached them after one week for complaining about the pressing problem of one of the keys in the keypad. That problems aroused after repairing and returning the laptop to complainant. Moreover one of the complaint from the side of complainant is that after repairing the laptop opposite party No.1 given back the laptop to complainant. At that time opposite party No.1 did not provide the charger with the laptop and due to the continuous calling from complainant they returned the charger to complainant. That also a clear deficiency of service from the side of opposite party No.1. Opposite party No.2 in their version and affidavit stated that complainant did not sent a legal notice to them regarding the problem of laptop and in the absence of such legal notice being served, they were not given an opportunity to verify the factual position of the present matter. But it is unbelievable because complainant entrusted his laptop to opposite party No.1 and they had given the laptop to the ACER service centre and they repaired complainant’s laptop. So the service person will surely intimate about this complaint of the complainant to opposite party No.2 because after repairing the laptop the repairing charge will pay to the service centre by opposite party No.2. Hence we are on the opinion that, as per the direction of opposite party No.2 the service centre repaired the laptop. There is clear deficiency of service and unfair trade practice from the side of both opposite parties. From the above points, we came to a conclusion that the newly purchased laptop was defective. Hence it is clear that the laptop has manufacturing defects. Nothing mentioned by opposite party No.1 in their version and affidavit about the actual defects caused to complainant’s laptop. Opposite party No.1 can easily produce the documents regarding the defects of the laptop from the service centre because they had entrusted the laptop for service to them. Hence we allow this complaint holding that opposite parties are deficient in service.
16. We allow this complaint as follows:-
- The opposite parties are directed to refund Rs.25,000/-.(Rupees Twenty five thousand only) the cost of the laptop to the complainant and complainant is directed to returned back the used laptop to opposite parties after receiving the payment.
- The opposite parties are directed to pay compensation of Rs.15,000/-(Rupees Fifteen thousand only) to the complainant on account of deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties and thereby caused mental agony, physical hardships and sufferings to the complainant.
- The opposite parties are also directed to pay Rs. 5,000/-(Rupees Five thousand only) as cost of the proceedings.
If the above said amount is not paid to the complainant within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order, the opposite parties liable to pay the interest at the rate of 12% per annum on the said amount from the date of receipt of the copy of this order till realisation.
Dated this 26th day of October, 2022.
MOHANDASAN K., PRESIDENT
PREETHI SIVARAMAN C., MEMBER
MOHAMED ISMAYIL C.V., MEMBER
APPENDIX
Witness examined on the side of the complainant : NIL
Documents marked on the side of the complainant : Ext.A1to A5
Ext.A1 : Copy of Tax Invoice given by opposite party No.1 to complainant on
10/09/2020.
Ext.A2 : Copy of email communication between complainant and opposite parties
dated 30/09/2020.
Ext.A3 : Copy of email communication between complainant and opposite parties
on 30/09/2020 and 02/10/2020.
Ext.A4 : Copy of grievance information forwarded by complainant to opposite parties
on 19/10/2020.
Ext.A5 : True copy of tax invoice given by opposite party No.1 to complainant on
10/09/2020.
Witness examined on the side of the opposite party : Nil
Documents marked on the side of the opposite party : Nil
MOHANDASAN K., PRESIDENT
PREETHI SIVARAMAN C., MEMBER
MOHAMED ISMAYIL C.V., MEMBER
