MR LAXMI NARAYAN PADHI, PRESIDENT… The factual matrix of complaint in brief
is that, the complainant had procured a Mobile set Make Gionee bearing IMEI No.862704027981418 on dated 10/01/2015 from OP.No-01 by paying an amount of Rs.17,700/-. After purchase of about six month within valid warranty period, the said mobile set shows hang and some other problems like, automatic switch on/off, internet, overheating battery etc. The complainant approached the Service center i.e. OP.no.2 and requested to redeem the set, who did nothing except formats the software and returned the set to the complainant but later the set became appears the same condition as it was in previous. The complainant again approached the OP.2 on dt.06.11.2015 and requested to necessary arrangement be made with the company to give a new set in place of the defective one, but who refused to her request, hence finally she contact the company i.e. OP.3, through phone in toll free number 1800 208 1166 but for no result thereof. Hence, she could reach the conclusion that the said set has manufacture defect which could not be repaired by the OP.s. The complainant submits that, she purchased the set by her long accumulated money but failed to use the set as per her wish and hope, hence inflicted great mental agony, humility, financial losses and valuable times due to the negligence service of OP.2 as well as defective set of company. Despite approaches, the OP.s highhandedly restrained to render their service which amounts to deficiency in service under Consumer Protection Act.1986. Hence finding no other way the complainant under compulsion craves the leave of this forum and prayed for justice. So she prayed the Forum to direct the OP.s to pay the price of said handset and a sum of Rs.75,000/- as compensation and Rs.5,000/- towards cost of the litigation for such negligent and deficiency in service.
2. On the other hand the OP.s neither appeared nor file any counter in spite several chances given in about three months of it’s admission. Hence the OP.s set ex parte as contemplated in Sec.13(2)(b) of the C.P.Act.1986. The complainant has filed cash invoice of the alleged mobile, service job sheet along with warranty card of the set. The complainant heard the case at length, perused the record and submissions considered.
3. The consumer protection act is a socio economic beneficial law, intended for speedy delivery of justice to the aggrieved and needy consumers and every complaint is supposed to be disposed off within a timeframe in consonance with the objects of the benevolent legislature, but inordinate delay in procurement of evidences and counter by the parties have emerged for reaching delirium to achievement of such objects.
4. From the above submissions, it is found that the complainant has procured the mobile set on dt.10.01.2015 by paying huge amount of Rs.17,700/- with a hope of better features and the same became defect with in valid warranty period. As per conditions applied in warranty, the complainant approached the OP.s for necessary repair, but the OP.s neither mend the set nor replaced with a new one despite of several requests. Considering the evidences, submissions by the complainant, we are of the view that, the mobile set purchased by the complainant has inherent defect and the OP.s failed to provide service to the complainant within warranty period. Thus the complainant sustained mental agony with the defective set, and also inflicted financial losses and valuable times due to the negligence and unfair practices of OP.s, hence under compulsion she filed the instant case and prayed for compensation.
5. From the above discussions and perusing the submissions by the complainant, we have carefully examined the alleged mobile set and found defects. It is further noticed that, despite service of notice of this forum the OP.s are failed to take any actions to settle the matter of complainant and there is nothing to disbelieve the contentions of complainant without appearance, filing counter and evidences by the OP.s, hence we feel that the action of OP.2 & 3 is illegal and unfair which amounts to deficiency in service and hence they found guilty under the provisions of the C.P.Act 1986, as thus the complainant is entitled for relief. Further it is seen from some mobile cases pending/disposed in the file of this forum that, the OP.no.2 being the authorized service provider of Gionee care is failed to provide satisfactory service to the customers of concerned mobiles, and for such malfeasance action, complaints of mobile increasing day by day against the OP Companies.
6. Provisions of C.P.Act 1986 for grant of compensation are a species developed from the law of Torts, price factor in calculating the damage for any loss in tort is subsidiary, the prime factor to consider is mental agony, harassment & negative social impact. An exemplary damage, should serve the purpose of hindering these absecue and unscrupulous traders continuing such unfair trade practices duping innocent customers, as thus we allow the complaint, with cost against the OP.no.2 & 3.
O R D E R
i. The opposite party no. 2 & 3 supra are severally and collaterally hereby directed to pay the price of the set Rs.17,700/- (Seventeen thousand & Seven hundred) only inter alia, to pay Rs.25,000/-(Twenty five thousand) as compensation and a sum of Rs.5000/-(Five thousand) towards the cost of litigation to the complainant, for such deceptive practices, deficiency in service and willful negligence.
iii. All the above directions shall be complied with in 30 days of this order, failing which, the total sum will bear 12% interest per annum till its realization. Pronounced on 16th day of April' 2016.
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT, DCDRF,
NABARANGPUR.
Date of Preparati
Date of dispatch :
Date of received by
the A/A for Ops / Complainant :
Initial of the dispatcher.
Memo No_______________ Dtd…………………………
Copy to the parties concerned.
PRESIDENT, DCDRF,
NABARANGPUR.
