Complainant Davinder Singh has filed the present complaint against the opposite parties U/S 12 of the Consumer Protection Act (for short, The C.P.Act.) seeking necessary directions to the opposite parties to return back the whole money of the Mobile i.e. Rs.23,690/- to him with 18% interest from the date of its due till its realization. Opposite parties be further directed to pay Rs.30,000/- on account of compensation for harassment and mental agony to him, in the interest of justice, equity and fair play.

2.        The case of the complainant in brief is that he had purchased  a Mobile phone Sony Experia AX Ultra through online shopping through opposite party no.1 for consideration of Rs.23,690/- on 22.01.2018 vide paisapay ID No.46648570707 which was delivered to him on 27.01.2018.  Thus he availed the services of the opposite parties, hence he is consumer of the opposite parties. He has further pleaded that when he opened the packet, he was surprised to see that the Touch screen was damaged and it was not working properly and it was already used phone. He immediately complained to the opposite party no.1 and they informed and said that they will inform him upto 31.01.2018. Then on 26.02.2018 the opposite parties sent their agent and took the damaged mobile from him. He requested so many times to the opposite parties to change his mobile phone or return his amount but they have not changed the mobile phone or return his amount till date. Thus, there is clear cut deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. Hence this complaint. 

3.         Notice issued to the opposite party no.2 had been received back with the report that ‘Addressee has no name’. From the perusal of that report and also from previous report it seems that opposite party no.2 intentionally and deliberately evading the service of the notice and made false reports with the connivance with the postal authorities. On 6.7.2018, case called several times but none had come present on behalf of opposite party no.2. Hence, opposite party no.2 was ordered to be proceeded against exparte.  Sh.H.S.Bathanwala, Adv. had appeared on behalf of opposite party no.1 but did not file his power of attorney and did not appear on 5.3.2019. Hence, it was ordered to be proceeded against exparte.

4.     Complainant has tendered into evidence his own affidavit Ex.CW-1/A alongwith copies of documents Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-4 and closed the evidence.  

5.       We have carefully gone through the file and scrutinized the documents produced alongwith complaint. It has transpired that complainant had purchased a mobile phone Sony Experia AX Ultra through online shopping through opposite party no.1 for a consideration of  Rs.23,690/- on 22.1.2018 vide Paisapay No.46648570707. Ex.C-1 proves payment of Rs.23,600/- from the account of complainant from S.B.I. Branch Gurdaspur and Ex.C-2 which is a confirmation of order by e-Bay also proves that the product was purchased through e.Bay, but to the utter surprise of the complainant the mobile set was found damaged from touch screen and was not working properly and it seems that the phone was already used.

6.     As per the version of complainant, the fact regarding broken screen was informed to opposite party no.1 which is proved by Ex.C-3 which is a Guarantee claim raised by complainant to e-Bay i.e. opposite party no.1. In this E-mail opposite party is admitting itself about the damaged phone and assuring the complainant that seller will contact him between 27.1.2018 to 31.01.2018. Ex.C-4 is a copy of pickup receipt dated 26.2.2018 which proves the version of complainant that phone was picked/collected by opposite party from his house. As per complainant nothing has been done since then. Neither the opposite party has changed his damaged mobile nor they have returned his entire paid amount. He is feeling harassed due to the deficiency in service by opposite parties.

7.       From above all discussion this Forum feels that complainant has been able to prove his complaint by the documents he has produced on the file and the opposite parties are held deficient in providing service to the complainant. The mode of payment, the delivery of phone at Gurdaspur and picking up of damaged phone are proved as per Exhibits referred above. Moreover, the opposite party no.1 has not controverted the allegations of complainant by contesting the complaint. As is clear from the scrutiny of the file that opposite party no.1 though appeared in the Forum, but had a very casual approach towards this complaint and did not file any written reply and his defense was struck off. Again at the time of filing evidence, the same approach was followed and failed to produce any evidence inspite of getting much opportunities and finally were declared exparte, for non appearance on 5.3.2019. Opposite party no.2 was already proceeded against exparte vide order dated 6.7.2018.

8.       Taking into consideration the circumstances discussed above, this Forum partly allows the present complaint. The opposite parties are directed to pay the entire sale price of the mobile phone i.e. Rs.23,690/-  to complainant within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of order. Opposite parties are further directed to pay Rs.10,000/- to complainant as compensation and litigation expenses. Entire compliance  be made within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of order, failing which the opposite parties will be burdened with interest @ 9% P.A. on the entire amount  i.e. Rs.23,690/- +Rs.10,000/- = Rs33,690/- from the date of  filing of the complaint.

9.        Copies of the orders be furnished to the parties free of costs. File is ordered to be consigned to the record room. The complaint could not be decided within prescribed time due to rush of work.

ANNOUNCED:                  (Shri Raj Singh)                   (Rajita Sareen)

 March 18, 2019.                   Member                         Presiding Member

 MK