DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BATHINDA

CC.No.423 of 18-08-2011

Decided on 25-11-2011

Rajinder Singh alias Shenky son of Balwinder Singh, aged about 23 years, Resident of MIG 575,

 Phase-II, Model Town, Bhagu Road, Bathinda.

.......Complainant

Versus

1. Sony Ericsson Mobile Communication (India) Private Limited, 4^th Floor, Dakha House, 18/17, WEA

    

   Karol Bagh, New Delhi-110005, through its CEO.

    

2. Randhawa Electronics, Subhash Market, Dhobi Bazar, Bathinda, through its Proprietor.

    

3. Neuron Computers, Hanuman Chowk, GT Road, Bathinda.

......Opposite parties

Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

QUORUM

Smt. Vikramjit Kaur Soni, President

Sh. Amarjeet Paul, Member

Smt. Sukhwinder Kaur, Member

Present:-

For the Complainant: Sh. K.S.Kuti, counsel for the complainant

For Opposite parties: Opposite parties exparte

ORDER

Vikramjit Kaur Soni, President:-

1. The present complaint has been filed by the complainant under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 as amended up-to-date (Here-in-after referred to as an 'Act'). The brief facts of the complaint are that the complainant purchased a mobile handset of Sony Ericsson, Model Yendo W 150, IMEI No.354265047882000 from the opposite party No.2 for a sum of Rs.5,250/- vide retail Invoice No.152 dated 21.04.2011 manufactured by the opposite party No.1 against one year warranty. In the month of July, 2011, the said mobile handset started giving problem as it used to get switched off of its own and used to get hanged and started giving less battery backup. The complainant approached the opposite party No.2 regarding the above said problem and the opposite party No.2 asked him to approach the opposite party No.3. On 03.08.2011, the complainant approached the opposite party No.3 and informed regarding the above said problems who attended to the problem vide Service Job Sheet No.7949 dated 03.08.2011 and checked the mobile handset and returned the same to the complainant by saying that it has been repaired and would not give any problem. On reaching at his home, the said mobile handset had the same problem. Thereafter, on 04.08.2011, the complainant again handed over the said mobile handset to the opposite party No.3 regarding the same problem and vide Service Job Sheet No.7959 dated 04.08.2011 attended the problem of the said mobile handset. The opposite party No.3 asked the complainant to take back the mobile handset and conveyed that it is beyond repair. The complainant has further alleged that the said mobile handset is within warranty period and it has been giving the same problem and there is some manufacturing defect in it. Hence, the complainant has filed the present complaint for seeking directions of this Forum to refund the price of the above said mobile handset alongwith interest, cost and compensation.

2. The opposite parties despite service of summons/notice have failed to appear before this Forum. Hence, exparte proceedings are taken against opposite parties.

3. To support his version, the complainant has led in evidence his own affidavit dated 18.08.2011 Ex.C-1; Photocopy of Retail Invoice Ex.C-2; Photocopies of Job Sheets Ex.C-3 & Ex.C-4 and his own affidavit dated 28.10.2011 Ex.C-5.

4. Arguments heard. Record alongwith written submissions submitted by the complainant perused.

5. The complainant has alleged that he had purchased one mobile handset of Sony Ericson from the opposite party No.2 of Rs.5,250/- vide retail Invoice No.152 dated 21.04.2011 with one year warranty. In the month of July, 2011, it started giving problem relating to automatically switch off, hangup and less battery backup. The complainant approached the opposite party No.2 who asked him to approach the opposite party No.3. On 03.08.2011, the opposite party No.3 attended to the problem vide Service Job Sheet No.7949 dated 03.08.2011. The mobile handset was returned to the complainant on the assurance that it has been repaired but the same problem reoccurred. On 04.08.2011, he again handed over the mobile handset to the opposite party No.3 regarding the same problem vide Service Job Sheet No.7959 dated 04.08.2011. After few days, the opposite party No.2 asked the complainant to take back the mobile handset as it was beyond repair. The complainant has further submitted that the said mobile handset is within warranty period and it has been giving the same problem repeatedly.

6. A perusal of documents placed on file shows that the complainant had purchased the Sony Ericsson Yendo W 150 for Rs.5,250/- on 21.04.2011 vide Ex.C-2. A perusal of Ex.C-3 shows that the mobile handset in question has a problem regarding hang up, less battery backup and it required testing. This job sheet has been issued on 03.08.2011.

7. As per the version of the complainant, the mobile handset was given back to him after repair but the problems relating to hangup, less battery backup reoccurred. As per Ex.C-4 dated 04.08.2011 i.e. job sheet issued by Neuron Computers. In this job sheet the problems of hangup, on/off, less battery backup are mentioned and it requires testing. A perusal of both job sheets shows that the mobile handset in question was not repaired by the opposite parties. The date of purchase of the said mobile handset is 21.04.2011 and the defects occurred and reported in the job sheets dated 03.08.2011 and 04.08.2011 i.e. after a period of approximately less than four months from the date of its purchase.

8. The opposite party No.3 has attended this Forum on few dates but had not filed its written statement and also not approach this Forum thereafter. Thus, the ex-parte proceeding are taken against opposite party No.3. Moreover, non appearance of the opposite parties shows that they are admitting their deficiency in service.

9. Therefore, in view of what has been discussed above, this Forum is of the considered view that the mobile handset in question purchased by the complainant, has defects that appeared within four months of its purchase i.e. within the period of warranty. The opposite party No.3 has duly issued the job sheet regarding the defects in the said mobile handset which could not be rectified on 03.08.2011 as well as on 04.08.2011 and thereafter, the complainant has approached this Forum on 18.08.2011.

10. Hence, this complaint is accepted with Rs.2,000/- as cost and compensation against the opposite party Nos.1&3 and dismissed qua opposite party No.2. The opposite party Nos.1&3 are directed to refund the price of the mobile handset in question i.e. Rs.5,250/- to the complainant and at the same time, the complainant will handover the said mobile handset alongwith all its assessories to the opposite party Nos.1&3. Compliance of this order be done within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. In case of non-compliance, interest @ 9% P.A. will yield on the amount of Rs.5,250/- till realization.

A copy of this order be sent to the parties concerned free of cost and file be consigned for record. '

Pronounced in open Forum

25-11-2011 (Vikramjit Kaur Soni)

President

(Amarjeet Paul)

Member

(Sukhwinder Kaur)

Member