DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,

BATHINDA

C.C. No. 708 of 18-11-2014

Decided on 01-04-2015

Veerpal Kaur aged about 23 years, D/o Sh. Jagjit Singh, R/o H. No. 23496, Street No. 2, Nachhattar Nagar, Bathinda.

…...Complainant

Versus

1. MPS Telecom Private Limited, 702 A, Arunachal Building, 19, Barakhamba Road, Connaught Place, New Delhi 110 001, through its Managing Director

2. HTC Customer Service, Radington India Limited (Black Berry), 95, Mount Road, Guindy Chennai – 600032, through its Managing Director

3. Bansal Mobile Care, Shop No. 6, SSD Sabha Market, The Mall, Bathinda, through its Partner/Proprietor

4. Unitech, HTC Service Centre, 2482A/6383, Near Street Bangi House, Mehna Marg, Bathinda, through its Managing/Owner

.......Opposite parties

Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

Quorum :

Sh. Surinder Mohan, President

Smt.Sukhwinder Kaur, Member

Sh. Jarnail Singh, Member

Present :

For the Complainant : Sh. Sanjay Goyal, counsel for complainant.

For the opposite parties : Exparte.

O R D E R

Surinder Mohan, President

1. Brief facts are that complainant purchased one mobile make HTC Desire X Dual SIM bearing IMEI No. 357037051825934 from OP No. 3 for Rs. 11,150/- vide invoice No. 164 dated 14-4-2014, manufactured by OPs No. 1 & 2. It is alleged that since the day of purchase, mobile in question is not working properly. Mobile set used to hang and its key pad was not working properly. Complainant handed over mobile in question to OP No. 4 i.e. authorized service centre of HTC mobiles, many times, but OP No. 4 used to return mobile without removing defects. On 30-8-14, mobile set completely hanged and stopped working. Complainant contacted OP No. 4 through her brother Gurwinder Singh and complained about the same. OP No. 4 conveyed to him that there is some manufacturing defect in the mobile set which cannot be repaired and asked him to leave the mobile set with them for replacement from the company. Complainant deposited mobile in question with OP No. 4 vide Job Card No. ATQ004-0001140 dated 30-8-14 and they asked him to inquire after 20 to 30 days. Thereafter complainant visited OP No. 4 time and again to collect the mobile set, but OPs postponed the matter on one excuse or the other and did not return the mobile to complainant till date. The complainant requested OPs to change the mobile set or refund its price, but they did not pay any heed to her requests and mobile set is lying with OP No. 4 since 30-8-2014. Infact there is some manufacturing defect in the mobile set which cannot be removed. OPs have failed to comply genuine demands of complainant and under such circumstances, she is entitled to 50,000/- as compensation for harassment and mental tension caused to her due to adamant attitude of OPs. That complainant is entitled to replacement of mobile set with new one or in the alternative refund of entire amount i.e. Rs. 11,150/- alongwith compensation of Rs, 50,000/- and cost of Rs. 5,000/- A prayer has been made accordingly.

2. Notice to OPs No. 1 & 2 were given through registered cover. Neither registered cover nor AD received back either served or unserved from them. Notice to OPs No. 3 & 4 were also sent and personally served, but none appeared on their behalf. Ultimately all the OPs were proceeded against exparte.

3. In her exparte evidence, complainant tendered documents Ex. C-1 Photocopy of retail invoice dated 14-4-2014; Ex. C-2 Photocopy of Job Sheet dated 30-8-14 and Ex. C-3 affidavit of Veerpal Kaur.

4. We have heard learned counsel for complainant and have gone through the record very carefully.

5. Complainant purchased one HTC Desire X Dual SIM mobile manufactured by OPs No. 1 & 2, from OP No. 3 vide invoice dated 14-4-2014 Ex. C-1. It is alleged that since date of purchase, mobile in question did not work properly. It used to hang and completely stopped/switched off. Key pad of mobile set was not working properly. Complainant handed over mobile set to authorized service centre of HTC mobiles i.e. OP No. 4 many times for repair, but they used to return the mobile without any repair after retaining the same with them for few days. On 30-8-2014, mobile set completely hanged and stopped working. Complainant again contacted OP No. 4. They checked mobile and told complainant that there is some manufacturing defect which cannot be removed and asked complainant to leave the mobile with them as it is required to be sent to Company i.e. OPs No. 1 & 2. Complainant handed over mobile in question to OP No. 4 vide Job Sheet dated 30-08-2014 Ex. C-2. A perusal of Job Sheet Ex. C-2 reveals that symptoms are mentioned as “Touch Panel function abnormally Hang + Qweety Key Pad not work in password (Touch not work).” In support of her complaint, complainant has placed on file her affidavit Ex. C-3 whereby she has deposed that she requested OPs time and again to change the mobile set or refund its price, but OPs did not pay any heed to her requests. Despite due service, OPs did not appear and file written version. OPs 3 & 4 despite personal service did not deem it fit to appear and bring actual facts before this Forum. OPs have failed to rebut evidence of complainant. The complainant has alleged manufacturing defect in mobile set in question, but she has not placed any expert evidence on file to prove manufacturing defect. As per para 11 of affidavit Ex. C-3 of complainant, mobile in question is lying with OP No. 4 since 30-8-2014. As discussed above, none of OPs appeared and filed written version. In such circumstances, version of complainant seems to be correct and she is entitled to the relief mentioned below.

6. In view of what has been discussed above, complaint is accepted against OPs No. 3 & 4 with cost of Rs. 2,000/- and dismissed qua OPs No. 1 & 2. Complainant may collect the mobile in question from OP No. 4 and handover the same to OP No. 3 within 15 days from the date of receipt of copy of order. OP No. 3 is directed to refund the price of mobile i.e. Rs. 11,150/- and Rs. 1000/- as cost of litigation to complainant within next 15 days from the date of receipt of mobile. Cost of Rs. 1,000/- will also be paid by OP No. 4 to complainant within 15 days from the date of receipt of copy of order.

7. Let certified copies of order be communicated to the parties free of cost and file be consigned to the record room. Announced :

   01-04-2015

   (Surinder Mohan )

   President

    

    

   (Sukhwinder Kaur)

   Member

    

    

   (Jarnail Singh)

   Member