MR LAXMI NARAYAN PADHI, PRESIDENT…                     The factual matrix of case is that, the Complainant, had purchased a mobile, make LAVA IRIS X1 ATOMS, bearing its IMEI No.911446101745829, on dated 03.09.2015 from OP.no.1 for Rs.4200/-. After one month the said mobile reported hang while calling, battery overheating, low battery backup etc. So the complainant approached the authorized service center OP No.2 requesting the above said problems, though he tried to mend the set but failed to rectify the defects. But later some days the mobile shows the same problems, so the complainant further approached the service center for two times and finally on dt.25.7.2016, though the OP.2 tried his best to rectify the defects but he failed and issued a job sheets to that effect. That further the complainant approached the OP.2 and handover the set for necessary repair and also requested him to replace the set with a new one through the Company, but he said that the set has some manufacture problems which could not be rectified and advised the complainant to contact the OP.3 for replacement or more services. As per advice of OP.2, the complainant approached the customer care of OP.3 through their number 18602007500 for several times and requested to replace the set with a new one, but for no action made by the OP.3. The complainant being an educated unemployed, highly depends on his mobile to search good jobs through mobile net and other facilities but he restrained from the same due to such malfeasance and poor deportment of OP.s, hence he compelled to purchased another mobile set from his hard earned money. So the Complainant inflicted mental stress, physical pain and financial hardship. So he prayed before the Forum to direct the OP.3 to pay the price of alleged handset and a sum of Rs.20,000/- as compensation and Rs.5,000/- as cost of litigation.

2.         The OP.s neither appeared on call nor file any counter in the case despite allowing adequate chances in its admission. Hence the OP.s set ex parte as per provisions envisaged in C.P.Act.1986. The complainant has filed cash invoice of the alleged mobile, service job sheet of OP.2, affidavit and warranty card of the set. The complainant minutely heard the case and perused the record.

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 reveals that the complainant has procured the mobile in question on dt.03.09.2015 and the same reported defect with in valid warranty period. It is seen that, the complainant time and again approached the OP.s reporting the so called defects, but the OP.s neither rectified the set nor replaced with a new one. Perusing the evidences, submissions by the complainant, we are of the view that, the mobile set purchased by the complainant has inherent defect and substandard one and the OP.s failed to render any satisfactory service to the complainant within warranty period. Thus the complainant suffered from 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 he craves the leave of this forum and prayed for legitimate compensation.

5.         We have orally examined the mobile in question and found internal defects. It is further noticed that, the instant case was lodged on dt.29.7.2016 and the same day notice has been issued to the OP.s vide this office/forum memo no.396 but despite receiving notice of this forum the OP.s are failed to take any actions to settle the matter of complainant and there is nothing doubt in the contentions of complainant without filing counter and evidences by the OP.s, hence we feel that the action of OP.3 is illegal, highhanded, arbitrary and unfair which amounts to gross negligence and deficiency in service, hence he found guilty under the provisions of the C.P.Act 1986, as such the complainant is lawfully entitled for compensatory relief. Thus the complaint is allowed against OP.no.3 with costs.                                                                         

                                                           O  R  D  E  R

i.          The opposite party no.3 supra is hereby directed to pay the price of the set Rs.4200/- (Rupees four thousand & two hundred) inter alia, to pay Rs.10,000/-(Ten thousand) as compensation and a sum of Rs.5000/-(Five thousand) towards the cost of litigation to the complainant.

ii.         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 this the 19th day of Oct' 2016.

    Sd/-                                                                  Sd/-

MEMBER                                               PRESIDENT, DCDRF,

                                                                    NABARANGPUR.

Date of Preparation: 

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.