Order-8.

Date-11/08/2016.

This is case u/s 12 of the consumer protection Act, 1986. In brief the case of the complainant is that the complainant has purchased one mobile phone of LENOVO model no.S650 IMEI No. 865189023943900 & 865189023943918 on 09/06/2015 from Op No.4 with an Insurance coverage with New India Assurance Co. Ltd. From the next day of date of purchased the said mobile phone started serious trouble and 19/06/2015 the complainant was compelled to hand over the mobile phone to the Op No.2 LENOVO authorized service centre, HCL Services Ltd. being service request no. SRIN1111506240042.

On 24/06/2015 while the complaint on enquiry came to learn from said service centre that mobile handset in question has major manufacturing problem and spare parts of the defective handset was not available and they are unable to repair at this stage. Thereafter complainant knocked the door of said service centre on several times one phone and on 29/06/2015 also by sending email asked the replace of the mobile set. On 03/07/2015 by sending mail by Op no.3 intimated complainant that replacement criteria in LENOVO is customer need to report the issue within 7 days from the date of purchase but this clause is not mentioned in the warranty booklet. Complainant for getting redressal appeard before this Forum with some prayer.

                                       Decision with Reasons

On careful perusal of complaint, evidence, documents and argument advance by the complainant and also considering the statement of W.V filed by the OP-1 and 3, we find the complainant had purchased one mobile phone from Op no.4 retail outlet of Op Nos. 1 and 3 on 09/06/2015 of Rs.7800/- plus Insurance coverage of Rs.599/- total worth Rs.8399/- . From the next date of purchased the mobile set in question started trouble and complainant intimated the problem along with the mobile phone to the Op No.2 service centre to Op no. 1 and 3 on 19/06/2016 and Op No.2 received the same vide service order no. S19062015015 where in the description column it is mentioned that “Touch is not working properly & some time network issue, set may be dead during software” etc.

On 24/06/2015 while complainant again visited the said service centre and on enquiry came to learn that the mobile set has major manufacturing problem and the spare parts of the defective and set was not available with them.

Then the complainant intimated the matter to Op no.4 and request them either to replace the mobile phone with a new one of same configuration or to refund the purchase price with the Insurance  coverage amount. There after the complainant knocked the ops over phone on several occasions and also by sending email requested them to replace or refund the amount on 03.07.2015 Op no.3 by sending mail replied that unfortunately we are unable to proceed further with the replacement as it does not fulfill the criteria i.e replacement criteria for the customers. Customers need to report the issue within 7 days from in voice date. But in the warranty documents there is no such provision is mentioned that customer need to report within seven days. The complainant also mentioned in his petition that at the time of purchase the op did not disclose the condition for replacement of new mobile phone against any manufacturing defect mobile .

Moreover ops have received Rs.599/- for Insurance coverage of the product but the purpose of Insurance coverage did not disclose.

In view of the discussions here in above we find that ops were deficient of service and sold  inherited defective the mobile phone by means of unfair trade practice and harassed the complainant with mental pain and also financial loss. The complainant is entitled to get relief.

The complaint case succeeds.

Hence, it is

                                                  Ordered,

That the complaint case is allowed in exparte on merit with cost of Rs.5000/- against the ops.

Op Nos. 3 and 4 are directed to replace New mobile phone cost of Rs.7800/- with same configuration or refund Rs.7800/- to the complainant apart from compensation of Rs.5000/- to the complainant for unfair trade practice and for causing harassment within one month from the date of this order failing which penal cost of Rs.200/- per diem shall be imposed till full satisfaction of the decree and if it is collected it shall be deposited to this Forum.