Delhi

West Delhi

CC/17/522

KIRPAL SINGH - Complainant(s)

Versus

AMAZON - Opp.Party(s)

31 Oct 2018

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM (WEST)

150-151; COMMUNINTY CENTER ; C-BLOCK; JANAK PURI; NEW DELHI

 

CASE NO.  522/17

1. Kiarpal Singh   R/o RZB 4,     Nanda  Block ,   Mahavir Enclave  New Delhi-110045                                                   …… Complainant

VERSUS

1. Amazon Seller Service Pvt. Ltd. Brigade  Gateway, 8^th Floor ,   26/1, Dr. Raj Kumar Road,   Malleshwaram  West Bengaluru,   Karnakta 560055.      ……                                                                                   Deleted  Order 12.07.2018.

 

2. Staitsh Etail Service   LLP Plot No. 33, Block A Mohan  Cooperative  industrial  Estate, New Delhi-110044.                                                …… Ex- parte

 

3. Sueipe Telecom Pvt. Ltd,F-4 A/B/C, Ist Floor ,    Metropol Building, Near Inox Threatre,  Bund Garden Road , Pune, Maharashrta-411001n                                   ….… Ex-parte
4. Perfect Tech. Care (SWP 025)  WZ -246,B-1, Ist Floor,  Back Side Entry Opposite Pillar No. 660, Near Uttam Nagar East Metro Station  Uttam Nagar  -110059                                           ....…. Ex-parte

O R D E R

 

 

K.S. MOHI, PRESIDENT

 

The complainant has filed the present complaint against the O.P under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986.  The facts as alleged in the

 

complaint are that the complainant had purchased    Swipe Konnnect Star Mobile  Phone from Amazon India Pvt. Ltd.  on 16^th  April, 2017 for sum of Rs. 3,799/- .  Aforesaid  mobile  is manufactured by Swipe  Telecom(OP-2 and had a warranty   of  one year.  It has been   averred in the complaint that the aforesaid mobile started giving trouble  after one month of its purchase and used to get over heated  and its screen became faulty. As a result complainant deposited  the mobile phone to it service centre OP-4  on 24.05.2017.  The service official  told the complainant to collect the phone within one month . But  when he contacted the service centre he was told  that spare parts of mobile were  not  available .  Whenever the complainant  approached service centre he was told that required parts of the mobile were not available and it would  take  some time  to get the same repaired. It is  the case of the complainant that till the filing of the complainant on 30.08.2017  he did not receive the mobile phone from  OP-4 .  The complainant also lodged the complaint  with the  manufacturer of mobile phone but no positive response was received.  Thereafter he filed the present complaint with the prayer that OPs to be directed  to refund  the   cost of phone or give him mobile phone  in perfectly working condition,  he has sought compensation of Rs. 10,000/- for harassment of mental toruture  and claimed Rs. 2,000/- towards litigation expenses. 

2. The notice  of  the complaint was sent to all the four OPs .  OP-1    appeared  and filed reply.  None appeared for OP-2 to OP-4 as a result OP-2 OP-3 and OP 4 were proceeded ex-parte  vide order dated 13-11-2017.  On

 

12.07.2018 the complainant  made statement in the  court that  OP-1  may be deleted from  the  array of the OPs  and accordingly the name of OP-1 was ordered to be  deleted from complaint.   

 3.    Complainant has filed his affidavit in ex-parte evidence testifying all the facts stated in the complaint.

4.     We have heard  Counsel for complainant   and perused the record.

5.     The complainant  has placed on record invoice dated 16.04.2017  whereby  the mobile in question was purchased from Amazon for sum of Rs. 3799/-. He has also placed on record  job sheet of OP-4   whereby mobile was deposited for repair on 24.05.2107 .  The mobile phone is stated to be still in the custody  of OP-4 and despite  repeated requests the same was not returned to the complainant nor did OP-4 repaired the same.The complainant has substantiated the contents of  his complaint by filing affidavit on oath .  There is absolutely  no reason to disbelieve the version of the complainant  also there is no rebuttal or challenge to the contenstions raised by complainant.  Therefore, we  conclude that the complainant has succeeded in establishing his case towards deficiency caused by OP-3 and Op-4 who have chosen  not to put up appearance  in the present case. 

        In view of the aforesaid  discussion and circumstances we  direct OP-3 and OP-4 to refund price  of mobile phone i.e. Rs. 3799/-  with interest @ 6%  from the date of  filing the present complaint till realization.  Both OPs are further directed to pay compensation to the complainant to the tune of Rs. 2,000/- towards harassment and mental tension and litigation expenses.   

Copy of this order be sent to the parties as per rules.

File be consigned to the record room. 

  Announced this___  __31 day of __October _____ 2018.

 

                                                                                                                       ( K.S. MOHI )                                                    (PUNEET LAMBA)                                                                                      PRESIDENT                                                             

MEMBER