By Smt.  Bindu. R,  President:

          This complaint is filed by Anitha. K, Veluthamparambil House, Krishnagiri Post, Meenangadi,  Wayanad, Kerala- 673 591  against  myG Future Bathery, Binzys Avenue,  Opposite  Jain Temple,  Sulthan Bathery,  Kerala-673 592, Represented by Manager/ Proprietor  as Opposite Party alleging  deficiency of service and unfair trade practice from their side.

          2. The case  of the Complainant is  that the  Complainant had purchased  a Nokia C 32 Mobile phone from  Opposite Party on 12.04.2024.  According to the Complainant on the  same day evening  the phone started configuring and the Complainant noticed the defect in phone’s  Wifi connectivity which rendered the phone unusable.  On 13.04.2024,  the Complainant reported the issue to the Opposite Party expecting resolutions, but the defect  remained unresolved.  The Opposite Party’s failure to address and rectify the issue constitutes deficiency of service and hence the Complainant  approached this Commission praying for issuing a direction to the Opposite Party to refund the purchase price along  with other reliefs.

          3. Even though notice was served to the   Opposite Party, the Opposite Party had neither entered into  appearance nor filed their version and hence the Opposite

Party is set exparte.

          4. Evidence from the  side of the Complainant includes Chief Affidavit of the Complainant and Exts.A1 to A3.

          5. The following are the questions to be analysed in this case.

1.  Whether the Complainant had sustained to any deficiency  of service or unfair trade practice from the side of the Opposite Party?
2. If so,  the compensation and costs for which the Complainant is entitled to get?

6. The case of the Complainant is that the Complainant had purchased a mobile

phone  from the Opposite Party which was a defective  one.  The Nokia C 32 Mobile Phone purchased by the Complainant from the Opposite Party was configuring and had  connectivity issues with the Wifi connection which made the phone unusable.  The Complainant states that on the very next day of purchase,  the matter was reported to the Opposite Party and they said that the same is due to the defect of  Wifi connection in the house of the Complainant.  But the technician who checked the Wifi connection tried to connect the mobile phone with different wifi connection but the same  defect was again shown by the mobile set.  Even though the Complainant requested for another mobile set the same was also refused by the Opposite Party and the phone  was sent to  Nokia Service Centre by the Opposite Party.  Later it was told that Opposite Party had changed the software  of the phone and told that the phone can be used by the Complainant.  But the Complainant did not accept the phone and according to her the Opposite Party is liable to give a new phone for which the Complainant is ready to pay the additional amount if any.  According to the Complainant the act of the Opposite Party  amount to deficiency of service and  unfair trade practice from their side. 

          7. The specific case of the Complainant is that from the date of purchase   itself the product shown  the alleged defect which  was intimated to the Opposite Party on the very next day.  The Complainant requested  for another set and she was ready to pay the balance amount if any to be paid which was not accepted by the Opposite Party.

          8. Considering the entire aspects and the failure of the Opposite Party to appear and defend the case even after receiving the notice from the Commission,  the Commission reached into the finding  that point No.1 is proved  by the Complainant in her favour.  Hence  the following  orders are  passed.

          1. Opposite Party is directed to refund  the total price of Rs.7,999/-                      

              (Rupees Seven thousand Nine hundred and Ninety Nine  only) to the

              Complainant.

2. Opposite Party is also directed  to pay an amount of Rs.2,000/-  (Rupees  

     Two thousand only) towards compensation to the Complainant.

3. Opposite Party is also liable to pay an amount of Rs.1,000/-  (Rupees One

    thousand only) towards cost of the proceedings.

Need less to say that the above ordered amount shall be paid by the Opposite

Party within 30 days  of receipt  of the copy of this order failing which the Opposite Party shall be liable to pay  interest at the rate of 6% for the amount,  except that  is awarded as costs,  from the date of order till the date of  realization.

          Consumer Case is allowed accordingly.

Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by him and corrected by me and pronounced in the open Commission on this the 13^th day of December 2024.

Date of filing:27.06.2024                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             PRESIDENT:  Sd/-                                                                                                                                                                                              MEMBER   :  Sd/-

APPENDIX.

Witness for the Complainant:

PW1.           Anitha. K                           Complainant.               

Witness for the Opposite Party:

Nil.

Exhibits for the Complainant:

A1.      Tax Invoice.                                     dt:12.04.2024.

A2.       Job Slip                                         

A3.       Letter.                                             dt:09.09.2024. 

Exhibits for the Opposite Party:

Nil.

                                                                                    PRESIDENT:  Sd/-                                                                                                                                                                                              MEMBER   :  Sd/-