ADVERTISEMENT
A District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in Delhi has ordered Lenovo Private Limited to pay ₹45,000 to a customer after finding the company liable for failing to rectify a recurring defect in a laptop, despite repeated service interventions. The order was issued by the Nand Nagri Commission in the North-East District on 16 October, in response to a complaint alleging negligence and deficiency in after-sales service, as per a Bar and Bench report.
The case — Mohd. Danish v. Lenovo Private Limited & Anr — centred on a laptop purchased with a two-year extended warranty. According to the complaint, the device began exhibiting a flickering display issue within its initial uses. Over the next one-and-a-half years, the problem worsened to the point that the laptop became unusable.
Danish, who was pursuing his LLB and simultaneously working as an intern, said he approached Lenovo multiple times for repairs. During various service visits, several key components, including the motherboard, RAM and display board, were replaced. However, the fault repeatedly resurfaced
Lenovo, in its written response, denied any negligence and maintained that each complaint had been addressed free of cost. It asked the Commission to dismiss the case.
After reviewing documents, repair logs and communications between the parties, the Commission concluded that the persistent malfunction — despite numerous repairs — indicated a manufacturing defect that had not been adequately resolved.
“In our considered opinion, when a new product goes out of order several times within the warranty period, itself is sufficient to show that there is some manufacturing defect in the product,” the order stated, as per Bar and Bench.
The Commission directed Lenovo to:
Pay ₹25,000 with 9% annual interest;
Pay ₹10,000 as compensation for mental harassment;
Pay ₹10,000 towards litigation costs.
The order also highlighted the recourse available to consumers under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, for addressing deficiencies in service, especially those relating to electronic goods.
The complainant appeared in person along with advocate Sanket Agarwal.