BEFORE THE ADDITIONALBENCH DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM AT MYSURU.

Consumer Complaint (C.C.)No. 1437/2016

Complaint filed on  24.08.2016

Date of Judgement.31.12.2016

PRESENT                                : 1. Shri Ramachandra  M.S.,  B.A., LL.B.,

PRESIDENT

                             2. Shri  Thammanna,Y.S., B.Sc., LL.B.,

MEMBER

Complainant/s               :       1. Vijaya Kumar. H.S. DMA.

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, No. 1542, F, Anikethana Road, C and D Block, JCST Layout, Kuvempunagar, Mysuru.

(Inperson)

V/s

Opponent        /s                     :    1. The Manager,

Asus India Pvt. Ltd., DHL Supply Chain India Pvt, Ltd., Survey No. 94/4, NG 207, Kuraloor village Viakadugudi post, Hoskote Taluk, Bangalore, Karnataka -560067.

     2. The Manager ,

Asus service centre, no.218, Upper 1^st floor MCC building makkaji chowk complex, opp. Indian Bank, Gandhi  Square,Mysure-570001.

    3. The Manager,

Registered office, WS  retail service  Pvt . Ltd., Ozone Manayteck, Park No, 56/18, B Block, 9^th Floor, Garvebhavipalya, Hosu road, Bangalore-560068.

    4.Flipkart internet Pvt. Ld.,

Vaishnavisummit, Ground floor,

7^th main, 80 feet Raod , 3^rd Block ,

Koramangala Industrial layout,

       Bangalore-56034.

(Exparte)

SHRI RAMACHANDRA . M.S., PRESIDENT

JUDGEMENT

This complaint filed under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act of 1986 against to opposite parties.

2. The brief facts alleged in the complaint are that I have purchased the handset VR44551/Asus model ZC550KL  6A/8916/16G/2G with serial No. G3AXB719X978A8H through flipkart on 20.06.2016 by paying Rs. 8,999/- I found display problem with the phone on 28.07.2016 immediately I approached the authorized service centre at Mysuru and narrating the defects noticed, requested for rectification of the same. On examination the handset, the service centre personnel informed me that LCD got damaged internally due to external force and the same may b e rectified on payment of repair charges. Since the handset was within warranty period, I requested them to rectify the defects free of cost. For which, the service centre personnel rejected my request to rectify the defects in free of cost and informed me the same can be rectified only on payment.

3. As directed by the service centre personnel, I contacted the customer care service centre of the Asus company,they also informed me that, the damage was caused due to external force only and hence, the same can be rectified on payment of charges, but not free of cost.

4. I sent mail to the Asus mobile service centre on 29.07.2016 and explained the defects found in the handset and the opinion expressed by the local service centre and their demand for rectification charges. The customer service centre replied that, the internal damage shall be rectified only on chargeable basis with discount on the part price.

5. Again I forwarded the photographs of he handset, to clarify the doubt raised and also to establish that, there were no external damage caused to the handset. Again on 12.08.2016 the opposite party replied that since the case cannot considered on warranty, the services will be provided on chargeable basis .However , promise to check the possibility of providing discount of 30% rates on the spare costs amounting to Rs. 2,851/-.

6. Agitating the offer made I once again demanded for rectification of the defects free of cost, but my requests were rejected. At last, the opposite party offered a discount of 50% on spares cost. Not satisfied with offer, the present complaint is filed seeking reliefs. I hereby enclosed the invoice copy along with main correspondences and notice for kind perusal.

7. Hence this complaint filed for deficiency in service .

8. The notice to all opposite parties is duly served as per the postal acknowledgement they have neither appeared nor failed version, and affidavit.. The opposite parties have failed to put forth their defence in the complaint. Hence they have been placed exparte in the case.

9. The complainant has filed chief examinationaffidavitalong with some documents were producedin support of hisclaim, arguments heard the matter is posted of orders.

10. The points that arise for our consideration are;-

1. Whether the complainant proves that there is deficiency in service by opposite parties for not considering claim of complainant there by whether complainant is entitle for relief as claimed in complaint?

2. What order?

11. Our answer to the above points is as follows;

1. Point No.1: Partly in the affirmative.

2. Point No.2: As per final order for the following;

REASONS

12. Point No.1:- In support of their claim, the complainants has filed  affidavit evidence reiterating the allegations made in the complaint and the averments in the affidavit are that he has purchased the handset  ASUS model ZC550KL  6A /8916/16G/2G on 20.06.2016 by paying of Rs. 8,999/- through flip cart. This fact is proved by the complainant by producing relevant documents to show that there is a sale transaction between complainant and opposite party on the said date.

13. Further it is alleged by the complainant on 28.07.2016 he found display problem with his phone immediately he approached the authorized service centre by narrating the defects and requested for rectification of same . The opposite party on examination informed the complainant that LCD got damaged internally due to external force and same may be rectified by payment of repair charges. Since hand set was within warranty period complainant requested them to rectify the defects for which the opposite party rejected his request. These fact is proved by the complainant by producing relevant documents to show that there is a several communication between complainant and opposite party regarding the issue of rectification of alleged handset and some of the e-mail copy which is sent by complainant to opposite party clearly established that on several occasion complainant has made all efforts in order to resolve the handset issue with opposite party. These efforts were not at all considered by the opposite party.

14. The opposite party has alleged that defect in the handset is due to  external force  and it is not a manufacturing defect. This contention of opposite party is not supported by any technical report for that reason whatever reason assigned by opposite party in order to reject the claim of complainant cannot be accepted at any stretch of imagination. for that reason the claim of the complainant has  to be held as proved.

15. The complainant alleged that the defect in the handset is occurred well within the warranty period for which the opposite party is liable to rectify or to replace the defect handset with new handset as per the warranty condition. The opposite party also failed to reply the letter of complainant for the request of rectification of defect in handset. These facts were proved the contention of the complainant and also proved that the opposite party has clearly violated contractual terms and conditions between complainant.and thereby for violation opposite party is liable to pay compensation and other reliefs as prayed by complainant.

16. For the above reasons by looking at the facts and documents produced by complainants has proved his case beyond reasonable doubt and also complainant proved that there is a deficiency  of service on the part of opposite party by doing unfair trade practice.

17. According to this forum we answered Point no.1 in the partly affirmative and pass the following:

18. Point no.2:- For the above discussion we here by proceed to pass the following:

ORDER

1. The complaint is hereby allowed in part.

2.The opposite party is directed to replace defective handsetwith

new handset of the same make to the complainant within 60 days of

this order.

3.The  opposite party is directed to pay  compensation of Rs. 5,000/-

and Rs. 3,000/- towards litigation expenses to the complainant

within 60 days of this order.

4. In default to comply, the opposite party shall pay interest at 12%

p.a. on the said total sum of Rs. 8,000/- from the date of this

order till payment.

5.In case of default to comply this order, the opposite party shall

undergo imprisonment and also liable for fine under section 27 of

the CP Act, 1986.

6. Give the copies of this order to the parties, as per Rules.

(Dictated to the stenographer transcribed, typed by her, transcript corrected by us and then pronounced in open court on the 31^stDecember 2016)  

Shri Thammanna Y.S.,                                 Shri Ramachandra M.S.,      

          Member.                                                    President.                                         

LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED AND DOCUMENTS MARKED ON BEHALF OF COMPLAINANT

Evidence by way of affidavit on behalf of complainant:

CW-1           :VIJAYA KUMAR H.S.

Documents marked on behalf of complainant:

Annexure.1 :         Payment receipt bill

Annexure.2 :         e-mail copies

Annexure.3 :         letter dated 01.08.2016

LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED AND DOCUMENTS MARKED ON BEHALF OF OP.

Exparte

Evidence by way of affidavit on behalf of OP:

Nil

Documents marked on behalf of OP:

Nil

Shri Thammanna Y.S.,                                 Shri Ramachandra M.S.,      

          Member.                                                    President.