Delhi

East Delhi

CC/373/2015

SACHIN - Complainant(s)

Versus

MANPREET TELECOM - Opp.Party(s)

14 Dec 2016

ORDER

                 DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM, EAST, Govt of NCT Delhi

                  CONVENIENT SHOPPING CENTRE, 1^st FLOOR, SAINI ENCLAVE, DELHI 110092                                  

                                                                                                  Consumer complaint no.        373 / 2015

                                                                                                  Date of Institution                 04/06/2015

                                                                                                  Order Reserved on                14/12/2016

                                                                                                  Date of Order                          15/12/2016  In matter of

Mr Sachin Agarwal  adult   

S/o  Sh. Shiv Kumar Agarwal 

R/o  68, GF, Jain Mandir Gali,

Shahdara, Delhi 110032…...…………………………….……..…………….Complainant

                                                                  

                                                                     Vs

Manpreet Tele Services   

A 159, 3^rd floor, Main Vikas Marg,   

Shakarpur Delhi 110092 ………..…………………………………..…………Opponent

 

Complainant ………………………………….In Person  

Opponent ………………………………………Ex Parte

 

Quorum          Sh Sukhdev Singh      President

                         Dr P N Tiwari               Member                                                                                                    

                         Mrs Harpreet Kaur    Member

 

Order by Dr P N Tiwari  Member 

Brief Facts of the case                                    

Complainant purchased a Micromax mobile vide EMIE no. 911354602011859 from M-Talk for a sum of Rs 4900/-on dated 03/07/2014 marked Ex CW1/1. It was insured for two years warranty against liquid damage and physical damage after paying Rs 490/-as marked Ex CW1/2.

Mobile started giving problem after four months of its purchase as display was not visible, so complainant contacted OP for rectifying problem and on demand, gave his mobile and original warranty card on 23/11/2014. It was assured to collect the phone after some time, marked here as CW1/3.

It was stated that even after repeated visit of complainant to OP, the said mobile was not returned.  When complainant did not get any reply satisfactory about his mobile status from OP, wrote number of emails, but did not get any reply as marked here CW1/4. Then he filed complaint at complaint at Mediation centre of Delhi Govt. at Patpargunj, Delhi vide ref. no. SR/7/PPG/D/2015, where also no outcome resulted as OP did not appear as marked here CW1/5. He felt harassed and thus he filed this complaint claiming return of his mobile with physical and mental harassment of Rs 50,000/-. 

Notice was served. None appeared for OP. By postal department acknowledgment, notices was served and none present or filed their written statement or evidence, so case proceeded Ex Parte. Complainant filed his Ex Parte evidences on affidavit which were on record. Arguments were heard and after file was perused, order reserved.

We have gone through all the facts and evidences on record, it was evident that the complainant had deposited his mobile with OP for repair, but did not get the same.  As mobile was under warranty still his mobile was neither repaired nor was returned to complainant. This clearly amounts deficiency of services by OP. Though the manufacturer was not made a necessary party in this case, so liability is on OP to get the problem rectified. Thus, complainant has succeeded in proving the deficiency of OP who had given two years warranty on the said mobile.  We come to the conclusion that this complaint has merit and the same deserve to be allowed with the following order—

1. OP is directed to rectify the defects in the said mobile within 30 days from the date of receiving of this order and shall hand over in good working condition.
2. We also award compensation of Rs 2000/- for mental and physical harassment by OP for his deficiency in service in not rectifying the defects even after receiving the mobile. This amount shall include the litigation cost also.  
3. If order is not complied in time essence, entire awarded amount shall carry interest of 6% which shall be payable by OPtill realized.    

The copy of this order be sent to the parties as per rules and file be consigned to the record room.

Mrs  Harpreet Kaur                                                                                                       (Dr) P N Tiwari

Member                                                                                                                                     Member                                                                                    

                                                         Shri Sukhdev Singh

                                                                       President