Skip to content


M/S. B’ Canti Infotech ((P) Ltd. Vs. M/S Nexus Computers (P) Ltd. and Another - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citation

Court

Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

Decided On

Case Number

First Appeal No. A/11/61(Arisen out of Order Dated 31/07/2010 in Case No. CC/298/03 of District Thiruvananthapuram)

Judge

Appellant

M/S. B’ Canti Infotech ((P) Ltd.

Respondent

M/S Nexus Computers (P) Ltd. and Another

Excerpt:


.....cost of the same ie.rs.3,54,500/- along with a compensation of rs.10,000/- and cost of rs.5,000/-. 2. the dealer did not contest the matter. the manufacturer/second opposite party contested the case and disputed the averments in the complaints with respect to the defects alleged. 3. the second opposite party/r2 remained absent in the present proceedings. r1, the dealer has not also entered appearance. 4. the case of the counsel for the appellant is that no purpose will be served by replacing the particular server which was purchased in 2002 and evidently out dated. an expert has been appointed by the forum to inspect the system which has been marked as ext.c1. it was reported that the server is having manufacturing defects; and no objection have been filed over the ext.c1 report. the appellant has also sought for interest from the date of installation from the amount paid and enhanced compensation. 5. we find that the complaint has been filed in 1.8.03. in the circumstances, we find that the complainant is entitled for interest for the price paid. the case of the complainant is that the server of 2002 if replaced would not be helpful as it would be out dated. we find that there.....

Judgment:


JUSTICE SHRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU,PRESIDENT

It is the case of the complainant that the IBM server manufactured by the second opposite party and purchased from the first opposite party was defective from very beginning and has sought for return of the amount paid ie; Rs.3,54,500/- with interest at 18% from 18.2.02 the date of installation and also to pay compensation of Rs.5,00,000/-. The Forum has ordered to replace the server with a new one or in the alternative to refund the cost of the same ie.Rs.3,54,500/- along with a compensation of Rs.10,000/- and cost of Rs.5,000/-.

2. The dealer did not contest the matter. The manufacturer/second opposite party contested the case and disputed the averments in the complaints with respect to the defects alleged.

3. The second opposite party/R2 remained absent in the present proceedings. R1, the dealer has not also entered appearance.

4. The case of the counsel for the appellant is that no purpose will be served by replacing the particular server which was purchased in 2002 and evidently out dated. An expert has been appointed by the Forum to inspect the system which has been marked as Ext.C1. It was reported that the server is having manufacturing defects; and no objection have been filed over the Ext.C1 report. The appellant has also sought for interest from the date of installation from the amount paid and enhanced compensation.

5. We find that the complaint has been filed in 1.8.03. In the circumstances, we find that the complainant is entitled for interest for the price paid. The case of the complainant is that the server of 2002 if replaced would not be helpful as it would be out dated. We find that there is merit in the contention of the counsel for the appellant. Hence, the order of the Forum is modified as follows:

The opposite parties are directed to pay a sum of Rs.3,54,500/- with interest at 9% per annum from 1.8.2003 the date of complaint and cost of Rs.5,000/-. The direction to pay compensation is deleted. The amounts are to be paid within 3 months from the date of receipt of copy of this order, failing which the appellant will be entitled 12% interest from 31.5.11 the date of this order.

The office will forward the LCR along with the copy of this order to the Forum urgently.




Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //