Tripura

West Tripura

CC/59/2017

Sri Satyabrata Mukharjee - Complainant(s)

Versus

Samsung Authorized Customer Service Centre. - Opp.Party(s)

Mr.P.Sahu, Mr. U.Das.

21 Sep 2017

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSSAL FORUM
WEST TRIPURA : AGARTALA

CASE NO:  CC-  59  of   2017

    Sri Satyabrata Mukherjee @ Sankar,
S/O- Late Pankaj Kumar Mukherjee,
Ramnagar Road No.6, P.O. Rmnagar,
P.S. West Agartala, West Tripura.
Near Alok Sangha Club.            .....….…...Complainant.

        VERSUS          

      1. Samsung Authorized Customer Service Centre,
C/O- S.B. Electronics,
Proprietor Sri Shyamal Banik,
H.G.B. Road, Agartala,
Near Madan Mohan Mandir,
Melarmath, Agartala,
West Tripura.

      2. Samsung India Electronics Pvt. Ltd.,
(Head Office), 2nd, 3rd & 4th  Floor, Tower C, 
Vipul Tech Spuare,
Golf Course Road, Sector 43, 
Gurgaon- 122002.                ............Opposite parties.

      3. Samsung Smart Phone Cafe,
G.S. Electronics, 161, H.G.B. Road,
Opp. to Tripura Commission for Women,
Melarmath, P.O. Agartala, 
P.S. West Agartala,
West Tripura.            ….........Proforma Opposite Party.

 

 __________PRESENT__________

 SRI A. PAL,
PRESIDENT,
  DISTRICT CONSUMER 
 DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,
      WEST TRIPURA, AGARTALA. 

SMT. Dr. G. DEBNATH
MEMBER,
  DISTRICT CONSUMER 
DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, 
  WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA.

SRI U. DAS
MEMBER,
  DISTRICT CONSUMER 
DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, 
  WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA.

 

C  O  U  N  S  E  L

For the Complainant        : Sri Promod Sahu,
                      Sri Utpal Das, 
                       Advocates.

For the O.P. No.1             : None Appeared.

For the O.P. No.2            :  Sri Kajal Nandi,
                      Advocate. 

For the O.P. No.3            : Sri Bimal Banik,
                      Attorney of O.P. No.3.

 

 

                    
JUDGMENT  DELIVERED  ON: 21.09.2017.

 

J U D G M E N T
        This case arises on the petition filed by one Satyabrata Mukherjee @Sankar. Petitioner's case in short is that he purchased one Samsung smart phone on payment of Rs.9000/- on 30.03.16. But it started battery backup problem on 23.03.17. Warranty was to expire on 29.03.2017. So, he went to the O.P. No.1, Samsung Authorized Customer Service Centre for replacement. Job card was issued. After 3 days complainant went to the Samsung Authorized Service Centre with the job card but the battery was not available for replacement. Again and again he went to the service centre. False assurance was given by the O.P. service centre but mobile was not repaired. There was deficiency of  service by the O.P. therefore, he filed this case claiming compensation Rs.1 lac. 

2.        O.P. No.3 appeared, filed written statement denying the claim.

3.        Written statement also filed by O.P. No.2, Samsung India stating that manufacturing company is not under compulsion to replace the defective mobile phone. The defect were not manufacturing defect at all. So such complaint should be dismissed. 

4.        On the basis of contention raised by the both the parties following points cropped up for determination;
        (I) Whether there was any deficiency of service by the O.Ps?
        (II) Whether the petitioner is entitled to get compensation?

5.        Petitioner produced the acknowledgment of service request, cash memo, warranty card and also produced the statement on affidavit of Satyabrata  Mukherjee@ sankar. 

6.        O.P. on the other hand produced the statement on affidavit of Anindya Bose, Authorized Representative of Samsung India Electronics Pvt. Ltd.

7.        Thereafter, written argument filed on behalf of the O.P. No.2 and the complainant.

8.        On the basis of all the evidences before us we shall now determine the above points.

            Findings and Decision;
9.        Fact of purchasing the mobile phone on payment of Rs.9000/- is admitted and established fact. The cash memo shows that it was purchased from Samsung Smart Phone Cafe. We have gone through the warranty card issued & found that the date of purchase is 30.03.16. Warranty was for one year. No Manufacturing defect found by the service centre as revealed from the job card issued. Battery backup problem is detected on 31.03.16 though request was made on 27.03.16. So within the warranty period request was made. Therefore Samsung Customer Service Centre was under liability to replace the defective battery within the warranty period. But it was not done. There was delay in replacement. Petitioner went to the service centre again and again. Some time they told technical problem. Some time they told that it was out of warranty. The company official assured him to meet the service centre. The company, O.P. No.2, Samsung India would not enforce the service centre to perform its duty properly. 4 months time gone but it was not replaced. This is harassment and service centre was liable for it. 

10.        We have gone through the statement on affidavit of Anindya Bose. He stated that the O.P. acted as per terms and conditions. But in the terms and conditions there is nothing to support that within the warranty period O.P. has no obligation to change the battery. The battery could have been changed within 15 days. But in 4 months it was not changed. So this is deficiency of service by both the O.Ps, Samsung Authorized Customer Service Centre and Samsung India Electronics Pvt. Ltd. O.P. No.1 and 2. We direct the O.P. No. 1 and 2 to replace the battery of the mobile phone and also pay compensation to the petitioner Rs.3,000/- for his harassment and Rs.2,000/- as litigation cost. O.Ps are to arrange the replacement of battery and hand over the phone  in good condition to the petitioner and also pay Rs.5,000/- for the deficiency of service. Order is to be complied  and payment is to be made within 2 months, if not complied it will carry interest @ 9% P.A.

 

Announced.

 

SRI A. PAL
PRESIDENT,
DISTRICT CONSUMER  DISPUTES 
REDRESSAL FORUM,
WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA.

 

 

SMT. DR. G. DEBNATH,
MEMBER,
 DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES 
REDRESSAL FORUM, 
WEST TRIPURA, AGARTALA    SRI U. DAS
MEMBER,
  DISTRICT CONSUMER 
DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, 
  WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA.