IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ALAPPUZHA
Saturday the 30th day of January, 2016
Filed on 20.07.2015
Present
1) Smt. Elizabeth George (President)
2) Sri. Antony Xavier (Member)
3) Smt. Jasmine D (Member)
in
CC/No.223/205
Between
Complainant:- Opposite parties:-
Sri. Babu, Pallekattu 1. Celkon Impex Pvt. Ltd.
Ward No. X, Cherthal South Hi-Tech City
Panchayath, Cherthala, Alappuzha Hyderabad – 500 081
Andra Pradesh
2. Mobile Bazaar, Margin Free
Mobile Shop, Oppo. Town School
Cherthala
O R D E R
SMT. JASMINE D. (MEMBER)
The case of the complainant in short is as follows:-
The complainant had purchased a mobile phone from the second opposite party manufactured by the first opposite party on 5.5.2015 for an amount of Rs.3,200/-. The phone became defective on the very next day of the purchase itself. On giving intimation, the defect was rectified by the second opposite party. But the same defect occurred again and the complainant entrusted the phone to the second opposite party on 21.5.2015 for repairing the defect. But the defect was not rectified so far. The mobile phone is with the second opposite party and it was not returned. Also the second opposite party behaved badly to the complainant in front of other customers and this cause much mental agony to the complainant. Hence the complainant filed this complaint.
2. Notices were issued to the opposite parties. Notice against the first opposite party was not returned. Notice against second opposite party returned as unclaimed. Hence second opposite party was set ex-parte.
3. The evidence in the case consists of proof affidavit filed by the complainant and documents produced were marked as Exts.A1 to A3.
4. Considering the allegations of the complainant the Forum has raised the following issues:-
1) Whether there is any deficiency in service or negligence on the part of the opposite
parties?
2) Whether the complainant is entitled to get the relief sought for?
6. Issues 1 and 2:- Issues 1 and 2 can be considered together. The case of the complainant is that he had purchased a mobile phone from the second opposite party manufactured by the first opposite party, but it became defective and entrusted with the second opposite party for rectifying the defect on 21.5.2015 but it was not repaired and returned so far. Also the opposite party behaved badly to the complainant in front of other customers and this caused much mental agony to the complainant.
7. The complainant filed proof affidavit and documents Exts.A1 to A3 were marked. Ext.A1 is the retail invoice dated 5.5.2015, Ext.A2 is the original job sheet dated 21.5.2015 issued by the 2nd opposite party and Ext.A3 is the warranty card. From the documents it can be seen that the complainant purchased a mobile phone from the second opposite party on 5.5.2015 for an amount of Rs.3,200/- and the product has one year warranty. The phone became defective and entrusted to the second opposite party on 21.5.2015. So it is clear that the defect arose immediately after purchase. From Ext.A2 it can be seen that the complainant entrusted the mobile phone to the second opposite party on 21.5.2015 for repairing. Ext.A3 made it clear that the product is under warranty. But it has not been repaired and returned so far. According to the complainant, time and again he approached the second opposite party for getting the phone repaired. But the opposite party unnecessarily delayed the repair. The complainant proved his allegation by supporting documents. Since the mobile has not been repaired and returned so far, the second opposite party has committed deficiency in service. The disputed mobile phone is with the second opposite party. So the complaint is to be allowed.
In the result, the second opposite party is directed to replace the mobile phone with a new one of the same model/price to the complainant with fresh warranty. The second opposite party is further directed to pay an amount of Rs.500/- (Rupees five hundred only) towards compensation for the mental agony and inconvenience caused to the complainant. No order as to costs. The order shall be complied within one month from the date of receipt of this order.
Pronounced in open Forum on this the 30th day of January, 2016.
Sd/- Smt. Jasmine.D. (Member) :
Sd/- Smt. Elizabeth George (President): Sd/- Sri. Antony Xavier (Member) : Appendix:-
Evidence of the complainant:-
Ext.A1 - Retail invoice dated 3.5.2015
Ext.A2 - Original job sheet dated 21.5.2015 issued by the 2nd opposite party
Ext.A3 - Warranty card.
Evidence of the opposite parties:- Nil
// True Copy // By Order
Senior Superintendent
To
Complainant/Opposite party/S.F.
Typed by:- pr/-
Compared by:-
