ZENITH COMPUTERS LIMITED MUMBAI Vs. P MANOJ & OTHERS PULAMANTHOLE
LAWS(KERCDRC)-2010-1-5
KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
Decided on January 13,2010

Zenith Computers Limited Mumbai Appellant
VERSUS
P Manoj And Others Pulamanthole Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) THE above appeal is directed against the order dated:13th December 2001of CDRF, Malappuram in OP:346/00. The appellant was the 3rd opposite party and the respondents were the complainant and opposite parties 1 and 2 in the said OP No:346/00 which was filed alleging deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties in effecting sale of a computer. Opposite parties 1 and 2 filed version admitting the sale of a computer system to the complainant and denied the case of the complainant regarding sale of defective computer to the complainant. They also denied the alleged deficiency of service. The 3rd opposite party/the manufacturer of the Zenith Computers denied the alleged deficiency of service.
(2.) BEFORE the Forum below P1 to P11 documents were marked on the side of the complainant and R1 warranty registration card on the side of the opposite parties. On an appreciation of the facts, circumstances and documentary evidence on record, the Forum below allowed the complaint in OP:346/00 directing the opposite parties to pay the complainant a sum of Rs.48.820/ - with interest and cost of Rs.3000/ -. Hence the present appeal by the 3rd opposite party who is the manufacturer, Zenith Computers.
(3.) WHEN this appeal was taken up for final hearing there was no representation for respondents 1 to 3. Learned counsel for the appellant/3rd opposite party submitted his arguments based on the grounds urged in the memorandum of the present appeal. He canvassed for the position that the complainant could not succeed in establishing his case regarding manufacturing defect and so the 3rd opposite party, the manufacturer cannot be made liable. Thus, the appellant/3rd opposite party requested for setting aside the impugned order passed against the 3rd opposite party. The points that arise for consideration in this appeal are: - 1. Whether there was any manufacturing defect in the computer system so as to make the 3rd opposite party/ manufacturer liable for the compensation? 2. Is there any sustainable ground to interfere with the impugned order dated:13th December 2001 passed by CDRF, Malappuram in OP:346/00.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.