Chandigarh

DF-I

CC/823/2015

Anubhav - Complainant(s)

Versus

Motorola Solutions India. - Opp.Party(s)

In person

21 Mar 2016

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-I,

U.T. CHANDIGARH

========

 

 

 

                               

Consumer Complaint No.	:	CC/823/2015
Date of Institution	:	11/12/2015
Date of Decision	:	21/03/2016

 

 

Anubhav s/o Sh. Anil Bhardwaj, resident of H.No.5081, Modern Housing Complex, Manimajra, Chandigarh.

…..Complainant

V E R S U S

Motorola Solutions India, Motorola Excellence Centre, 415/2, Mehrauli – Gurgaon Road, Sector 14, Near Maharana Pratap Chowk, Gurgaon through its proprietor.

……Opposite Party

 

 

QUORUM:	MRS.SURJEET KAUR	PRESIDING MEMBER
	SURESH KUMAR SARDANA	MEMBER

 

                                       

                                                                       

ARGUED BY	:	Complainant in person
	:	OP ex-parte

                       

         

PER SURJEET KAUR, PRESIDING MEMBER

1.         Sh. Anubhav, complainant has filed this consumer complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, against Motorola Solutions India, Opposite Party (hereinafter called the OP), alleging that on 15.9.2015, he purchased a Moto Xplay Mobile of OP and paid Rs.20,000/- through credit card. The handset was having warranty of one year. According to the complainant, soon after delivery, the mobile set became defective and non-functional on 19.10.2015. The complainant contacted the service centre, but, it did not pay attention to the defect and told that the same did not come within warranty period as motherboard is out of order and asked for Rs.15,000/- for the repair. Alleging that the aforesaid acts amount to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OP, the complainant has filed the instant complaint.
2.         OP did not appear despite due service, therefore, it was proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 29.1.2016. 
3.         The complainant led evidence in support of his contentions. 
4.         We have gone through the record and heard the arguments addressed by the complainant in person.
5.         It is evident from the bill placed on record with the complaint that the complainant purchased one Motorola (Xplay) mobile for Rs.20,000/- on 15.9.2015 with one year warranty. As per the case of the complainant, the handset in question got defective and non-functional on 19.10.2015 just within one month of its usage.  When the complainant contacted the service centre, he was told that the motherboard has to be changed and the cost for the repairs will be Rs.15,000/-.  Various emails are produced on record by the complainant through which he tried to communicate with the OP though its customer help desk, but, no fruitful result was there for these emails.
6.         Pertinently, the OP chose not to appear before this Forum and was proceeded ex-parte. Therefore, the evidence of the complainant has gone unrebutted.
7.         It is evident from the emails that the OP was aware of the fact that the complainant was in trouble with the product sold by it just after using it for a few days. Despite knowing the fact that it was a band new handset, no effort was made by it to help the consumer i.e. the complainant.  In our opinion, due to irresponsible attitude of the OP, the complainant has certainly suffered a lot.  We feel that it was the duty of the OP to satisfy the complainant by getting his handset repaired in a perfect manner, but, it failed to do so. Therefore, non-providing of proper services even after various requests, despite the handset being within the warranty period, and non-appearing during the proceedings of the present case, clearly points out towards deficiency in service on the part of the OP which certainly has caused mental and physical harassment to the complainant.
8.         In view of the above discussion, we are of the opinion that the present complaint deserves to succeed. The same is accordingly partly allowed. The OP is directed as under :-

(i)     To refund the invoice price of the handset in question i.e. Rs.20,000/- to the complainant.

(ii)    To pay Rs.7,000/- as compensation for mental agony and harassment caused to the complainant;

(iii)   To pay Rs.5,000/- as costs of litigation to the complainant. 

9.         This order be complied with by the OP within one month from the date of receipt of its certified copy, failing which it shall make the payment of the amounts mentioned at Sr.No.(i) & (ii) above, with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of filing of the present complaint till realization, apart from compliance of direction at Sr.No.(iii) above.
10.         The certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge. The file be consigned.

	Sd/-	Sd/-
21/03/2016	[Suresh Kumar Sardana]	[Surjeet Kaur]
hg	Member	Presiding Member