Summary
The Supreme Court upheld dismissal of a consumer complaint over a diagnostic analyser. The purchaser could not demand an on-board laundry feature never promised in the brochure, or installation without the expressly stipulated 1 KVA online UPS. A manufacturer’s email conditionally approving another UPS did not override the agreed installation requirement, which addressed local electricity conditions. No manufacturing defect, deficient service or restrictive trade practice was established.
Issues
- Whether the seller had promised the disputed additional feature.
- Whether insisting on the stipulated online UPS amounted to a restrictive trade practice.
Held
- The quotation and brochure expressly required an air-conditioned room, a 1 KVA online UPS and broadband for the remote diagnostic facility. The brochure mentioned on-board cooling, but contained no commitment to the separate on-board laundry feature demanded. (¶¶ 3, 6, 9–10)
- The manufacturer’s conditional email did not override the installation prerequisites stipulated for electricity-supply conditions in the country. Insistence on compliance did not establish deficient service or restrictive trade practice on these facts. (¶ 7–10)
- The concurrent consumer-forum findings disclosed no error warranting interference; malfunction or manufacturing defect had not been established. (¶¶ 6, 10–11)
Result
Appeals dismissed. Consumer-forum orders rejecting the complaint remained undisturbed.