The district consumer disputes redressal forum here has directed the HCL Infosystems Limited and online portal, kaunsa.com, to compensate complainants for deficiency in services.
In the first case, Vikas Thakur of SAS Nagar had moved the forum against the HCL as regards defects in a laptop he had purchased in November 2012. The complainant had submitted that he had bought the laptop for Rs 27,000 from a shop in Sector 20 here with a warranty of nine months.
He had alleged that soon after the purchase, the laptop's DVD player developed a defect. Subsequently, Thakur approached the vendor, who did not pay heed to his problem and, instead, gave him a company's email ID. After four months and many visits to the vendor, Thakur claimed that the DVD player was replaced.
Later, the laptop's speaker went out of order but, this time, the fault was not rectified in spite of many requests, Thakur had claimed.
The company, in its written reply, said it was informed about the problem in the DVD player. It was replaced under warranty period on April 12, 2012, the HCL said. It, however, denied that the speakers went out of order as the “fault” was not brought to their notice.
The consumer forum, in its order dated November 18, found HCL deficient in rendering proper service and directed it to replace the speakers and make them functional to the satisfaction of the complainant. The forum directed the company to pay `5,000 as compensation and `3000 as cost of litigation.
In another case, the forum had, on November 13, directed admin of kaunsa.com to refund Rs 11,083 to complainant Ravinder Saini (if not already refunded). Besides, the admin has been directed to pay Rs 5,000 as compensation and another Rs 5,000 as cost of litigation to the complainant.
Saini of Sector 47 moved the consumer forum against the portal, saying that in June, he had placed an order for a mobile phone of Samsung by making payment of Rs 11,083.
He claimed that the online portal had assured to deliver the product in 15 days but it failed to do so. When he did not receive the mobile phone for a month, he cancelled the order and sought a refund of the amount. He was assured of the refund but did not get it in spite of many requests.
As none appeared on behalf of the online portal, it was proceed against exparte.