BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, PONDICHERRY

                                   C.C.No.25/2016

Dated this the 20^th day of November 2017

(Date of Institution: 28.06.2016)

 B. Thillaivel S/o Balasundaram,

No.4, III Cross, Velmurugan Nagar,

Kosaplayam,

Pondicherry – 605 013.                          

 …                             Complainant

                                                           Vs

1. M/s. POORVIKA MOBILES PVT.LTD,

     Rep. by its Authorized Signatory,

     Branch Office, No.181, Anna Salai,

     Pondicherry – 605 001.

2.  M/s. POORVIKA MOBILES PVT.LTD,

     Rep. by its Authorized Signatory,

     Head Office, No.30, Arcot Road,

     (Opp. Meenakshi college),

     Kodambakkam, Chennai – 600 024.

3. M/s. G. TECH.,

    Rep. by its Authorized Signatory,

    No.565, Kamarajar Salai,

    Pondicherry – 605 013.

4. M/s. MICROMAX HOUSE.,

    Rep. by its Authorized Signatory,

    Head office, No. 90B, sector – 18,

    Gurgon, Haryana. Pin – 122 015.

5. M/s. MICROMAX INFORMATICS LTD.,

    Rep. by its Authorized Signatory,

    Plot No. 234, HPSIDC Industrial Area,

    Tehsil Nalagarh, Dirstrict Solan,

    Pin – 173 205. 

                                                              …                       Opposite Parties         

BEFORE:

THIRU. A. ASOKAN, B.A., B.L.,

PRESIDENT 

Thiru V.V. STEEPHEN, B.A., LL.B.,

MEMBER

Tmt. D. KAVITHA, B.A., LL.B.,

MEMBER

FOR THE COMPLAINANT            :  Thiru S. Savariram, Advocate 

FOR THE OPPOSITE PARTIES   :    For OPs 1 and 2: Thiru R. Rajaprakash, 

Advocate

                                                               OPs 3 and 4 :  Ex parte

O R  D  E  R

          This is a complaint filed under sections 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986  for  directing the first opposite party to take back the defective product i.e. "Micromax" Mobile Phone and to refund the cost of the Mobile Phone for a sum of Rs.4,600/- with interest at the rate of 12% p.a.; directing the opposite parties to pay the complainant a sum of Rs.80,000/- towards compensation for the sufferings and mental agony;  directing the opposite parties to discontinue the unfair trade practice and to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards cost of this complaint. 

          2. Notice was issued to the opposite parties.  The opposite parties 1 and appeared through Counsel and filed reply version.  The OPs 3 to 5 remained absent and set ex parte.  The complainant was examined as CW1 through proof affidavit and Exs. C1 to C8 were marked.  Since the complainant was not appeared for cross-examination from 25.4.2017, his chief examination was discarded on 27.07.2017.  Hence, the matter was posted for OP side evidence and also production of material object by complainant.    

3. Today this complaint was called.  Complainant absent.  Counsel absent.  OPs 1 and 2 present.  Counsel for OP1 and 2 absent.  No representation made by complainant and did not take any steps to produce the disputed cell phone and not opted for cross-examination by the Counsel for OP.  No interest shown by the complainant.  Hence, this complaint is hereby dismissed for default.  No costs. 

Dated this the 20^th day of November 2017.

1.  ASOKAN)

PRESIDENT

(V.V. STEEPHEN)

MEMBER

(D. KAVITHA)

MEMBER