Chandigarh

DF-I

CC/172/2018

Ms Suchita Jaiswal - Complainant(s)

Versus

Motorola Mobility India Pvt. Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

In Person

24 Jul 2018

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-I, U.T. CHANDIGARH

========

 

                                     

Consumer Complaint No.	:	CC/172/2018
Date of Institution	:	19/04/2018
Date of Decision	:	24/07/2018

 

Suchita Jaiswal, R/o H.No.138, Sector 35-A, Chandigarh – 160022.

....Complainant

V E R S U S

 

[1]     Motorola Mobility India Pvt. Ltd., Building No.7A, 12^th Floor, Tower-D, DLF Cyber Green, Phase-III, Gurgaon – 122002 (Haryana), through its Manager.

 

[2]     M/s Sant Rameshwari Enterprise, SCO 26, First Floor, Sector 20, Chandigarh, through its Manager.

 

…… Opposite Parties

 

QUORUM:	SH.RATTAN SINGH THAKUR	PRESIDENT
	MRS.SURJEET KAUR	MEMBER
	SH.SURESH KUMAR SARDANA	MEMBER

                                                               

ARGUED BY	:	Sh.Vinod Jaiswal, GPA of Complainant.
	:	OPs ex-parte.

                       

PER SURESH KUMAR SARDANA, MEMBER

1.         Ms.Suchita Jaiswal, Complainant has preferred this Consumer Complaint under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, against M/s Motorola Mobility India Private Limited and Another (hereinafter called the Opposite Parties), alleging that she had purchased a Motorola G5 Plus mobile handset on 22.08.2017 for Rs.15,900/- through Amazon.in, carrying a warranty of one year. In less than six months of its purchase, the said mobile handset developed problems related to no sound output & ringer not working and had been repaired by the Opposite Parties with futility. Hence, alleging the aforesaid act and conduct of the Opposite Parties as deficiency in service and indulgence into unfair trade practice, the Complainant has instituted the present Complaint.     
2.         Notice of the complaint was sent to Opposite Parties seeking their version of the case. However, nobody appeared on behalf of Opposite Parties despite service, therefore, they were proceeded ex-parte.
3.         Complainant led evidence.
4.         We have gone through the entire evidence and heard the arguments addressed by the GPA of the Complainant (Opposite Parties being ex-parte). 
5.         In the present circumstances, the averments of the complaint have gone unrebutted in the absence of the Opposite Parties who were duly served and preferred neither to appear in person, nor through their Counsel. It is established beyond all reasonable doubts that the complaint of the Complainant is genuine. The harassment suffered by the Complainant is also writ large. The Opposite Parties have certainly and definitely indulged into unfair trade practice as they ought to have resolved the matter by effectively repairing the Mobile handset, in the first instance, or in the alternative, by replacing the same with a new one, which they failed to do and rather propelled this unwarranted, uncalled for litigation upon the Complainant. No customer will purchase a product with a view to purchase headache. At any rate, the Opposite Parties even did not bother to redress the grievance of the Complainant, despite having approached for the same by the Complainant time & again.  Thus, finding a definite deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties, we have no other alternative, but to allow the present complaint against the Opposite Parties.
6.         For the reasons recorded above, the present complaint of the Complainant deserves to succeed against the Opposite Parties, and the same is partly allowed. The Opposite Parties are, jointly and severally, directed:-

[a]   To refund to the invoice price of the mobile handset amounting to Rs.15,900/- to the Complainant;

                                                               

[b]   To pay to the complainant Rs.3,000/- as compensation for mental agony and harassment;

[c]   To pay to the complainant Rs.3,000/- as costs of litigation.

7.         The above said order shall be complied within 30 days of its receipt by the Opposite Parties; thereafter, they shall be liable for an interest @9% per annum on the amounts mentioned in sub-para [a] & [b] above from the date of institution of this complaint, till it is paid, apart from cost of litigation as in sub-para [c]. 
8.         The Complainant shall return the defective mobile handset in question, if it is in her possession, to the Opposite Party No.2, after the compliance of the order.
9.         The certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge. The file be consigned.

Announced                                    

24.07.2018

Sd/-

                          (RATTAN SINGH THAKUR)

PRESIDENT

 

Sd/-

(SURJEET KAUR)

MEMBER

 

Sd/-

 (SURESH KUMAR SARDANA)

MEMBER