E-Paper
Chandigarh trader wins 3-year legal battle over defective printer
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission 1 has also directed the printer manufacturer, Apsom Infotex Limited, Thane, Maharashtra, to pay ₹20,000 as compensation and ₹10,000 as litigation costs to the complainant
A trader’s three-year legal struggle to provide his customers high-quality printed fabric products has earned him a complete refund of ₹3.54 lakh that he had paid for a faulty garment printer in August 2019.
Observing that the manufacturer miserably failed to set right the problem in the product in question, which was deficiency in service, the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission 1 has also directed the printer manufacturer, Apsom Infotex Limited, Thane, Maharashtra, to pay ₹20,000 as compensation and ₹10,000 as litigation costs to the complainant, Maninder Singh.
Proprietor of Digital Vision, Sector 38-C, Singh had submitted that he bought a garment printer, Roland Versa Studio BT-12, from Apsom Infotex Limited for ₹3.54 lakh.
The printer, which prints designs on cotton T-shirts, tote bags and cushion covers, was installed on August 14, 2019.
However, after he began selling the fabric products, he started receiving complaints from customers that the prints were fading in three to four washes.
Singh lodged a complaint with the opposite party (OP) via email, but they failed to resolve the problem despite repeated requests.
‘No inherent defect in printer’
In their reply, the firm stated that there was no inherent defect in the printer and averred that, via email, they had advised the complainant to change the printing mode to “Pro-2 mode” for effective printing and to avoid blurring of ink on the textiles, but the complainant did not follow the instructions.
They also contended that the blurring of ink was attributable to the method of washing and type of detergent being used. Further, the blurring of ink was tested by washing similar products under different modes and favourable outcomes were seen, as shared via e-mail on January 13, 2020.
However, the commission observed that the product in question could not yield the promised result. As such, the complainant lodged complaints with the OP vide various communications and follow-ups, but the OP could not fix the defect, which forced the complainant to file a complaint before the Chandigarh Consumer Association. But even then, the OP did not resolve the issue, which caused immense harassment and mental agony to the complainant.
Hence, the OP was directed to refund the printer’s full cost within 30 days, failing which interest at 12% per annum will also be levied on the refund and compensation.
