Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for respondent No.2.

2.      Here is an appeal filed u/s 15 of the erstwhile Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter called the ‘Act’). Parties to this appeal shall be referred to with reference to their respective status before the District Forum.

3.   Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the complainant has purchased a Laptop from OP No.1 on 5.6.2007 and during warranty period the Laptop became defective. After the Laptop became defective two to three occasions, he requested to replace the same. OPs did not listen to it for which the complaint was filed.

4.      OP No.1 was set ex parte. OP No.2 submitted that the complainant had brought the Laptop two times and it was repaired by OP No.2 but there was no warranty for the Laptop. So,  there was no deficiency in service on its part.

5.      Learned District Forum after hearing the complainant an OP No.2 passed the following order:-

                             “xxx   xxx   xxx

In the result, the complaint is allowed on contest against the OP 2 and exparte against OP 1. The OP 2 are directed to attend the defects found in the laptop and get it rectified fully, if necessary, by replacement of certain parts free of cost. The order be complied with by the OP 2 within two months from the date of communication of this order.”

6.      Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the learned District Forum at least should have  directed for replacement of  the Laptop because the Laptop was given trouble from time to time which clearly shows that there is manufacturing defect. Therefore, he submitted to set aside the impugned order by allowing the appeal directing for replacement of the Laptop.

7.      Considered the submission of learned counsel for    the appellant and respondent No.2 and perused the DFR including the impugned order.

8.      The impugned order in para – 8 is as follows:-

                   “xxx   xxx   xxx

8. It is admitted by the OP 2 in the written version that on 30.7.2007, 18.12.2007, 2.2.2008 & 5.4.2008, defects were noticed in the laptop and complaint was lodged with OP 1 and it was repaired. It is the complaint of the complainant that the laptop is not functioning at present, therefore, when the defects were noticed within the warranty period and it continues, it cannot be said that at present there is no warranty and the defects found in the laptop cannot be attended to free of cost. it is true that no  notice was issued to OP 2 regarding defects noticed in the laptop but the Company were aware of the defects which was informed to them by OP 1 and has been indicated in the written version. Therefore,  it cannot be said that the company were kept in dark about the defect found in the laptop. Despite the fact that the company were not intimated by the complainant regarding defects found in the laptop, for such defects, both the company and retailer are jointly & severally liable to repair the same or to refund the cost of the same which has been well settled. As such the OP 2 is liable to get the laptop repaired to bring it to proper working con