(1.) THIS is an appeal against the order of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum -II, U.T., Chandigarh [hereinafter, referred to as District Forum -II, for short] dated 21.12.2004 in Complaint Case No. 207 of 2004 : Ms. Neha Sharma v. M/s. Micro Track (Business Support) and Another.
(2.) IN brief the complaint is that the complainant purchased an assembled computer and a printer from the O.Ps. on 16.11.2003 vide Invoice Nos. 39 and 38 of even date for Rs. 26,800/ - and Rs. 6,000/ - respectively and paid the price in cash. It is averred that at the time of purchase oral guarantee for the assembled computer and the printer was given. Her request for giving a guarantee in writing was brushed aside by the O.P. on the plea that the O.Ps. are in the trade for a long period and enjoys good reputation and, therefore, the complainant should not insist on for giving guarantee in writing. It is alleged that from the beginning the computer did not work properly and the complainant made a number of complaints to the O.Ps. and telephoned but no action was taken by the O.Ps. Because of the defective computer and printer the complainant suffered great loss in her studies and sometimes she was forced to go to computer cafe or some friends for completing her studies/task on their computers. The problems with the computer and printer, as alleged, by the complainant are as under:
(3.) VERSION of the O.Ps. is that only a printer was sold to the complainant for Rs. 6,000/ - and for which a written guarantee had been provided by the manufacturer itself. It is further stated that only computer components listed in Invoice i.e., Annexure C -1 were sold to the complainant and no assembled computer as such was sold. It is also alleged that the complainant has not paid the price of the computer and the printer. It is further alleged that whenever the O.Ps. demanded money from the father of the complainant for the items sold, they complained of defects in the computer and the printer, which did not exist at all. It is also stated that whenever any complaint was made by the complainant the O.Ps. promptly attended to it and, therefore, there is no deficiency in service. It has been submitted by the O.Ps. that since no money has been paid for the computer parts and the printer, the complainant is not a consumer.