THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KOZHIKODE.

C.C.524/2012

Dated this the 2^nd   day of September 2013.

 

            ( Present: Sri. G. Yadunadhan, B.A., LLB.                         : President)                      

                 Sri. L. Jyothikumar, B.A., LLB.                         : Member

 

 

                       

 

ORDER

 

By L.Jyothikumar, Member:

           

            The petition was filed on 23.11.2012. The case of the complainant is that he had purchased a Sony Ericsson Experia Ray(ST 181) worth Rs.18,700/- vide invoice No.4291 from the second opposite party which was manufactured by Ist opposite party. After 10 days the mobile phone became damaged. Then complainant went to the third Opposite party to rectify the defects. The third opposite party   informed that they had changed the software and now the mobile phone is free of problem. After 4-5 days, the mobile phone became damaged. After changing the soft ware the opposite party No.3 returned the mobile phone. Then the next day itself the mobile phone again showed problems. The complainant went to the second  opposite party and to the fourth opposite party to let them know the problems that the complainant was going through. The fourth opposite party said that the first opposite party has stopped the production of sony Ericsson Experia Ray. Due to the repeated problem, they said that they will try to replace the mobile phone. After absent one month, the fourth opposite party informed that, they were not ready to change the mobile phone and also added that the third opposite party was not giving the approval to change the mobile phone. The complainant refused to take back the mobile phone from the 3^rd opposite party. The opposite parties had not taken any steps to redress the grievance of the complainant. The complainant is alleging deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties and also requesting to direct the opposite parties to refund the purchase amount of Rs.18,000/-. Hence this petition is filed against opposite parties for seeking relief.

 

Notice was served to the opposite parties. Opposite party No.1 filed version denying the allegation in the complaint except those that are expressly admitted. There was no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. The complainant is not liable to get any amount from the opposite party. Hence the opposite party prays to dismiss the petition with cost to opposite party.

 

After serving the notice opposite party No.1 to 4 appears before the forum. But opposite party No.2 to 4 have not filed any version. When the case was posted for the examination of the complainant on 31.07.2013, all the opposite parties called absent and set-exparte.

 

The only point for consideration is whether the complainant is entitled for any relief.

 

Complainant was examined as PW1 and Exts.A1 to A11 were marked on complainant’s side. No documents produced on the side of the opposite parties.

 

The complainant’s case is that he had purchased the mobile phone from second opposite party. After 10 days the mobile phone became damaged. From the beginning itself complainant had approached the opposite party to get the mobile phone rectified. Several times complainant approached the opposite parties but opposite parties had not taken any step to redress the grievances of the complainant. We have verified the documents and looked into all aspects put forward by both sides. From the evidence it is clear that from the very beginning itself phone was not working properly. From the evidence of the complainant forum is convinced that the opposite parties were deficient in service and indulged in unfair trade practice. Hence we are of the opinion that the complainant is entitled for relief.

 

In the result the petition is allowed and all the opposite parties are jointly and severally liable for the refund of the amount of Rs.18,700/- with compensation of Rs.5000/- to the complainant within one month from the date of receipt of the order. Failing which the opposite parties are directed to pay interest @ rate of 10% for the total amount from the date of order till realization.

 

Pronounced in the open court this the 2^nd  day of September  2013.

Date of filing:23.11.2012.

 

 

 

            SD/-PRESIDENT                                   SD/-MEMBER

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

APPENDIX

 

Documents exhibited for the complainant:

A1. Purchase details of the cash bill datd.31.08.2012 for Rs.18700/-

A2.Service details of the mobile phone dtd.17.09.12.

A3. Service details of the mobile phone dtd.27.09.12

A4. Service details of the mobile phone dtd.01.10.12.

A5. Purchase details of the Sony dtd.07.09.2011.

A6. Purchase details of the Sony Xperia mini dtd.18.10.11.

A7. Purchase details of the mobile phone dtd.24.11.2011

A8. Service details of the mobile phone dtd.31.10.11.

A9. Service details of the mobile phone (2Nos. in series) dtd.08.11.2011.

A10.Service acknowledgment details dtd.28.11.2011.

A11. Service details of the mobile phone dtd.30.11.2011

 

Documents exhibited for the opposite party:

Nil

 

Witness examined for the complainant:

PW1.Saijith.K(Complainant)

 

Witness examined for the opposite party:

None

                                                                                                            Sd/-President

 

//True copy//

 

(Forwarded/By Order)

 

 

SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT