| Complaint Case No. CC/251/2018 | | ( Date of Filing : 21 Aug 2018 ) |
| | | | 1. Mr. Shamendra Kujur, General Manager (Finance) | | Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd., Calcutta Telephone, Room No. 244, 2nd Floor, Telephone Bhaban, 34, B. B. D. Bag (South), Kolkata - 700001. And at Flat No. 802, Sanchar Minar, 4, New Road, Alipur, Kolkata - 700027. |
| ...........Complainant(s) | |
| Versus | | 1. The Director, Motorola Mobility India Pvt. Ltd. and 3 others | | 12th Floor, Tower D, DLF City Phase - 3, Gurugram - 122010, DLF Cyber Greens, DLF Cyber City. | | 2. Motorola Solutions India Pvt. Ltd. | | Motorola Excellence Centre, 415/2, Mehrauli-Gurgaon Road, Sector 14, Near Maharana Pratap Chowk, Gurugram, Haryana - 122001. | | 3. ALCO Info-Tech Pvt. Ltd. | | Ground Floor, E-mall, Chittaranjan Avenue, Chandni Chawk, P.S. - Bowbazar, Kolkata - 700072. | | West Bengal | | 4. Anand International | | 233, Diamond Harbour Road, Kolkata - 700034. |
| ............Opp.Party(s) |
|
|
| Final Order / Judgement | Order No. 6 dt. 06/12/2018 The case of the complainant in brief is that the complainant purchased one Motorola X1170-101N mobile phone at a price of Rs.24,900/- on 14.10.17 from o.p. no.2 and within the warranty period the complainant found that the mobile phone was not giving proper service and even after receiving the call the mobile phone started shutdown automatically. The complainant also noticed that when the battery charge became below 50% the mobile phone became switched off. On the basis of the said fact the complainant visited the service centre and the service centre could not provide any assistance, for which the complainant filed this case praying for direction upon the o.ps. for refund of the amount paid by him as well as compensation and litigation cost. In spite of receipt of notices the o.ps. did not contest this case by filing w/v and as such, the case has proceeded ex parte against them. The complainant did not file the evidence; on the contrary, he filed a petition stating that the petition of complaint filed on affidavit by him be treated as evidence. The complainant in order to prove the case filed some documents including the retail invoice as well as several correspondences made with o.p. no.1 being the manufacturer of the said mobile set for replacement of the same, but no effective step was taken. It is also relevant to mention here that the defects arose in the said mobile set occurred during the warranty period. The complainant took all steps to apprise the o.ps. highlighting the defects faced by him in respect of the said mobile set, but o.ps. did not cooperate with him for which the complainant had to file this case. The evidence of the complainant has remained unchallenged; therefore we have no other alternative but to accept the contention of the complainant. In view of facts and circumstances as stated above, we hold that there is gross deficiency in service on the part of o.p. no.1 and the complainant will be entitled to get the relief. Thus the case is disposed of accordingly. Hence, ordered, That the CC No.251/2018 is allowed ex parte with cost against the o.p. no. 1 and dismissed ex parte without cost against other o.ps. The o.p. no.1 is directed to refund the amount of Rs.24,900/- (Rupees twenty four thousand nine hundred) only to the complainant along with compensation of Rs.5000/- (Rupees five thousand) only for harassment and mental agony and litigation cost within 30 days from the date of communication of this order, i.d. an interest @ 8% p.a. shall accrue over the entire sum due to the credit of the complainant till full realization. The complainant is also directed to return the mobile phone in question to the o.p. no.2 after realization of the awarded sum. | |