Chandigarh

DF-II

CC/313/2018

Sh. Shobhit Goel - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Incharge, Lenovo Authorized Service Centre, (Sysnet Global Technologies (P) Limited - Opp.Party(s)

J.C. Kapoor Adv.

06 Jun 2019

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II, U.T. CHANDIGARH

======

Consumer Complaint  No	:	313 of 2018
Date  of  Institution	:	06.06.2018
Date   of   Decision	:	06.06.2019

 

 

 

 

 

Shobhit Goel, resident of Houser No.779, Sector 21, Panchkula (Haryana)

             ……..Complainant

 

Versus

 

1]  The Incharge, Lenovo Authorised Service Centre, (Sysnet Global Technologies (P) Limited), SCO No.2461-62, Second Floor, Sector 22-C, Chandigarh 160 022

 

2]  Sudipto Ghosh (Executive Director-Service , Lenovo India) Lenovo Technical Support, Bangalore (Regd. Office) Lenovo India Pvt. Ltd., Ferns Icon, Level-2, Doddenakund Village, Marathhalli Outer ringh Road, Marathhalli Post, Kr. Puram Hobli, Bangalore 560037

………. Opposite Parties

 

BEFORE:  SH.RAJAN DEWAN            PRESIDENT

SMT.PRITI MALHOTRA        MEMBER

            SH.RAVINDER SINGH         MEMBER

 

Argued By: Sh.J.C.Kapoor, Adv. for complainant.

Opposite Party No.1 exparte.

Sh.Ashim Aggarwal, Adv. for OP No.2.

 

 

PER RAVINDER SINGH, MEMBER

 

         The case of the complainant, in brief is that, he purchased a Lenovo Laptop on 2.5.2015 for Rs.40,989/- (Ann.C-1).  It was carrying warranty upto 1.5.2016, which was extended upto 1.5.2018 by purchasing of Lenovo Peace of Mind Offer on making payment of frs.1499/- on 17.6.2015 (Ann.C-2).  It is stated that the said laptop started giving trouble and as such a complaint was made with Service Centre/Opposite Party NO.1 on 19.8.2017 for “touch pad failure”, which was attended to by it.  It is averred that again another complaint was made on 29.11.2017 for boot failure and the laptop was taken to Opposite Party No.1, which acknowledged the hard disc failure.  It is stated that thereafter, multiple issues including screen flickering were faced for which a complaint was made with Opposite Party NO.1 and laptop was submitted with it on 6.1.2018, which was duly acknowledged.  It is submitted that within a day of receipt of the laptop, another set of issues were faced.  Then a complaint dated 23.4.2018 was sent by the complainant to OPs mentioning therein the defects in the Lenovo Laptop, but no action has been taken. A legal notice was also sent to the Opposite Parties, but to no avail. Hence this complaint has been filed alleging deficiency in service on the part of Opposite Parties.  

 

2]       Opposite Party NO.1 did not turn up despite service of notice, hence it was proceeded exparte vide order dated 20.8.2018.  

         The Opposite Party No.2 filed reply and while admitting the factual matrix of the case, stated that the complaint with regard to problem in Laptop was made on 29,11,2017 wherein HDD was replaced free of cost under warranty and the same was handed over to the complainant on 1.12.2017 (Ann.OP2/2).  It is stated that on 6.1.2018 the complaint was received with LCD issues in the Laptop, the said issue was resolved by replacing the LCD free of cost under warranty (Ann.OP2/3).  It is also stated that on 23.3.2018 flickering issue was reported and it was found that the said issue was caused due to LCD Cable fault, which was resolved by replacing the cable free of cost under warranty (Ann.OP2/4).  It is stated that every service has been provided to the complainant as and when required.  It is submitted that the complainant reported the issue after nearly 1 year of purchase, which were duly rectified free of cost under warranty which proves that there is no inherent manufacturing defect in the laptop. It is also stated that the complainant despite having availed proper services and parts replacement, free of cost under warranty, wanted replacement of Laptop, which is not permissible as per warranty terms (Ann.OP2/5). Denying all other allegations and pleading no deficiency in service, the Opposite Party No.2 has prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

 

3]       Rejoinder has been filed by the complainant thereby reiterating the assertions as made in the complaint.  

 

4]       Parties led evidence in support of their contentions.

 

5]       We have heard the ld.Counsel for the complainant, ld.Counsel for Opposite Party NO.2 and perused the entire record.

 

6]      The complainant has purchased Lenovo Laptop on 2.5.2015 for Rs.40,989/-, which was having warranty upto 1.5.2016 and the extended warranty on said Laptop was availed upto 1.5.2018 by making payment of Rs.1499/- by the complainant.

 

7]       The complainant was admittedly provided all services to the Laptop by way of repair by the Opposite Parties as and when it was so reported.  The OPs have replaced the HDD and LCD of the Laptop during extended warranty period on 29.11.2017 & 6.1.2018 respectively, free of cost.   The Opposite Parties have also attended the LCD Cable Fault on 23.3.2018 when the matter was brought to the notice of Opposite Party No.1 by the complainant.

 

8]       The Opposite Party No.2 in its  reply has stated that the Laptop after needful repair, from time to time, is now in proper working condition and no further complaint of any kind was raised by the complainant after 23.3.2018.

 

9]       The electronic devices are prone to various technical problems. The Laptop in question reported with problem for the first time after nearly one year of its purchase and the same cannot be construed to be having any manufacturing defect as the same was attended to and got repaired to the satisfaction of the complainant. The warranty means liability of the manufacturer/service centre to attend to the repairs, whatsoever may occur due to its usage.  The Opposite Parties have honoured their commitment and had repaired the Laptop in question without any lapse or reservation on their part. The complainant has failed to substantiate his allegations of manufacturing defect in the Laptop. Therefore, no deficiency in service in made out against the Opposite Parties.

 

10]      Keeping into consideration, the complete facts, as discussed in the preceding paragraphs, the complaint is found to be bereft of any merit and as such dismissed.  No order as to costs.

          Certified copy of this order be sent to the parties, as per rules.

Announced

6^th June, 2019                                                              

Sd/-

 (RAJAN DEWAN)

PRESIDENT

                                                                                               

Sd/-

                                                                    (PRITI MALHOTRA)

MEMBER

 

Sd/-

(RAVINDER SINGH)

MEMBER