ALEXANDER ZACHARIAH Vs. ELSON ALIAS, ZINAGE SYSTEM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present Revision Petition under Section 21(b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short "the Act"?) has been preferred by the Complainant against the order dated 30.11.2018 passed by the Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Thiruvananthapuram (for short "the State Commission"?). By the impugned order the State Commission has dismissed the Appeal preferred by the Complainant against the Order dated 30.09.2016 of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Ernakulam (for short "the District Forum"?) vide which the District Forum had dismissed his Complaint.

(2.) Briefly stated the facts of the case, as stated in the Complaint, are that the Complainant had entrusted his laptop to the Opposite Party for repair. It is stated that while repairing the said laptop its motherboard was damaged. As the Opposite Party was not willing to provide another laptop or to pay any compensation for the loss occurred to the Complainant, he lodged a Complaint before the Police Station Thevara on 15.05.2014. Before the Police Authorities after discussions the Opposite Party agreed to give a new battery with guarantee for a period of 6 months on payment of half of the price. Thus a new battery was provided to the Complainant on payment of half the price of the battery. But the said battery retained charged only for an hour and 10 minutes and in the subsequent months the said battery retained charged only for 25-37 minutes. The Complainant had taken the same to the Opposite Party on 07.11.2014 and had demanded replacement of the battery but the Opposite Party refused to do so. The Complainant lodged a Complaint with the Police Authorities but the Police Authorities did not take any action, whereafter the Complainant had to file a Complaint before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate First Class, Ernakulam on 26.11.2014. The Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate ordered the police to investigate and submit the report. The Police filed the Report before the said Court on 06.11.2015. The Court directed the Complainant to seek relief through the Consumer Fora. Thus the Complainant filed Complaint before the District Forum seeking the following reliefs:-

(3.) The Opposite Party filed the Written Version resisting the Complaint. The preliminary objection was raised on the maintainability of the Complaint on the ground that the Complaint was filed against the Manager of Zinage Systems and such a post does not exist with the Opposite Party and hence dismissal of the Complaint was sought for non-joinder of the necessary parties. On merits the averments made in the Complaint were denied. It was denied that there was any negligence or laches on the part of the Opposite Party. It was stated that the Complainant earlier submitted the laptop to Corona Systems and Services at Kottayam and they replaced the motherboard of the said laptop. Opposite Party informed the Complainant that original motherboard V 6000 was replaced with DV 6000 model motherboard. The Complainant then asked the Opposite Party to replace the power port with V 6000 model. The Opposite Party accordingly rectified the defects and the Complainant took the delivery. After 10 days the Complainant came to the Opposite Party and complained that the battery was dead. The Opposite Party was ready to provide new battery on payment basis for which the Complainant did not agree and instead filed a Complaint against the Opposite Party with the Police Station Thevara. On the advice of the Police the Complainant was provided with a new battery on half the price with six months warranty. When the warranty period was to expire on 14.11.2014, Complainant approached the Opposite Party on 07.11.2014 and complained that the battery was not having back-up. On enquiry it was made known to the Opposite Party that the Complainant used to charge the battery over-night for more than required time to get full charge and thereby reduced the back-up power of the battery. Instead of surrendering the battery to enable the Opposite Party to replace the battery, Complainant filed a Police Complaint on 07.11.2014 and thereafter a Complaint before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate First Class, Ernakulam on 26.11.2014. It is stated that the Opposite Party is not liable to replace the battery free of cost since the Complainant did not surrender the defective battery within the warranty period.