Karnataka

Bangalore 4th Additional

CC/3157/2017

Prashanth N, - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Manager (swipe team), Swipe Telecom India Pvt. Ltd., - Opp.Party(s)

16 Mar 2018

ORDER

Complaint filed on: 08.12.2017

                                                      Disposed on: 16.03.2018

 

BEFORE THE IV ADDL DISTRICT

CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BENGALURU

 1^ST FLOOR, BMTC, B-BLOCK, TTMC BUILDING, K.H.ROAD, SHANTHINAGAR, BENGALURU – 560 027       

 

 

CC.No.3157/2017

DATED THIS THE 16^th MARCH OF 2018

 

PRESENT

 

 

SRI.S.L.PATIL, PRESIDENT

SMT.N.R.ROOPA, MEMBER

 

Complainant/s: -                           

Prashanth N,

Aged about 25 years,

Room No.605, Park View PG, Near Hombegowda Playground, 9^th B cross, Wilson Garden, Bengaluru-27.

 

Inperson     

 

V/s

Opposite party/s

Respondent/s:-

 

1. The Manager (swipe team),

Swipe Telecom India Pvt. ltd., Unit no.S-2, S-3, 1^st floor, Metropole building,

Near Inox Theatre,

Bundgarden Road,  

Pune-411001

 

2. The Head,

Xcelency Mobile Services (SWP065),

Maruthi Electronic Plaza,

1^st floor, Pylvan M Krishnappa Road, S.J.P.Road cross

(Opp. to Dasappa Hospital

side gate) S.P.Road,

Bengaluru-02.

 

Ex-parte

 

 

PRESIDENT: SRI.S.L.PATIL

 

 

            This complaint is filed by the Complainant against the Opposite party no.1 & 2 (herein after referred as Op.no.1 & 2 or Ops) seeking issuance of direction to pay compensation of Rs.5 lakhs towards mentally tortured, irritated, self-depressed, got losses and scarified entertainment.

 

          2. The brief facts of the case of the Complainant are that, he bought Swipe Elite Plus Mobile (hereinafter referred as the said mobile handset) from online flip kart store on 06.10.16 worth Rs.4,948/-. It is the case of the Complainant that, after a few days his mobile had hanging problem, since mobile was on under warranty period of 1 year, he took the mobile to Op.no.2 which is the authorized service centre to solve an issue on 09.05.17. That was the first time he given his mobile to Op.no.2 and received after a month. Again his mobile got the same hanging problem and again he took his mobile 2^nd time to Op.no.2 for repair dtd.06.06.17 and received after a month. After few days are passed, he could not able to hear an audio/voice if he plug an ear phone to his mobile, so, he walked again into the service center to solve the issue on 11.09.17, till now he has not yet received his mobile, whenever, he call service center they are giving instruction to call customer care number 08793038038 following there instruction, he has called many times to customer care but they are not providing him the valid answer and keep on postponing the dates for a week. He tried to contact them through email regarding the same with the customer care but till now, no valid reply from them. The Complainant further submits that, disturbed mentally by repeated calling to customer care to know the status and also his reputation in the company has hurt, whenever his mobile got repair, he has to beg his friends for mobile for a month due to this he got self-depressed and prestige in his friends circle has been affected and he was doing trade in the stock market due to lack of mobile and internet connection he lost focus on stock/trade marketing instead this he could not deserve profit. Currently he was looking for a job change whenever any information or paperless work regarding job search he need to use paid cyber center number of times. He was totally dependent on free JIO network scheme connecting with some sort of entertainment since he is staying in PG his entertainment and relax time is his mobile. Hence prays to allow the complaint.

 

3. Inspite of notice served on Ops they did not appear, hence placed exparte.

         

          4. The Complainant to substantiate his case filed affidavit evidence and got marked the documents as Ex-A1 to A6 and also filed written arguments. Heard the Complainant.

  

5. The points that arise for our consideration are:

1. Whether is there any deficiency of service on the part of Ops, if so, whether the Complainant entitled for the relief sought for ?  
2. What order ?

 

                   

           

 

6.  Our answers to the above points are as under:

 

Point no.1: In the Affirmative  

Point no.2: As per the final order for the following

 

REASONS

 

          7. Point no.1:  In the instant case, even the service of the notice, Ops did not appear to contest the claim of the Complainant by way of filing the version, hence placed exparte. Under such circumstances, non-appearance and non-filing of version draw an adverse inference that, the Ops have admit the claim of the Complainant in the light of the decision reported in in 2018(1) CPR 325 (NC) in the case of Kotak Mahindra Old Mutual Life Insurance ltd., vs. Dr.Nishi Gupta, wherein it is held as “non-filing of the written version amounts to admission of allegations made by the Complainant in the consumer complaint”. Anyhow, we place reliance on the available materials on record for just disposal of the case. We have briefly stated the contents of the complaint, wherein, the Complainant has specifically pleaded with regard to the deficiency of service on the part Ops. Looking to the contents of Ex-A1 which is an invoice of the said mobile handset purchased for an amount of Rs.4,948/-. As the said mobile set having the hanging problem and audio problem, Complainant handed over the same for repair for three times as per Ex-A2 to A4. In all three times, Op got repaired the said mobile as it was under warranty period. With regard to all three said services as described under Ex-A2 to A4, Complainant has received the said mobile handset stating that the job has been done to his satisfaction. Inspite of three services, the said handset was not properly functioning. In this context, again Complainant informed to Op.no.2 with regard to the fault on the said mobile handset through emails as per Ex-A5 to A6. As the said mobile set having the hanging problem and audio problem, Ops ought to have get rectified the mistakes, if the said handset is within the warranty period. Ex-A2 to A4 goes to show that, all the three times repairs of the said mobile handset was under the warranty period. Thereafter also, the Complainant has sought for rectification of the mistakes which also well within the time. It is settled preposition of law that, if any kind of object purchased for the value found to be defect, it is to be rectified by the manufacturer or the service centre or the seller, if it is under warranty period. In the instant case, we noticed that, the said mobile handset was under warranty period at the time of handing over the same to the Op for service. In this view of the matter, we direct Ops to rectify the mistake in respect of hanging problem and audio problem within six weeks from the date of receipt of this order, if not, to replace the said handset by providing similar feature of new handset or else to refund the cost of Rs.4,948/- as shown in invoice marked as Ex-A1 with cost of litigation of Rs.1,000/-. Accordingly we answered the point no.1 in the affirmative.

 

8. Point no.2: In the result, we passed the following:

 

ORDER

 

          The complaint filed by the Complainant is hereby allowed.  

 

          2. Op.no.1 & 2 are directed to rectify the mistake in the said mobile handset in respect of hanging problem and audio problem within six weeks from the date of receipt of this order, if not, to replace the said mobile handset by providing similar feature of new handset or else to refund the cost of Rs.4,948/- as shown in invoice marked as Ex-A1 upon furnishing of the said mobile handset by the Complainant.

 

3. Ops are also directed to pay cost of litigation of Rs.1,000/- to the Complainant.

         

          Supply free copy of this order to both the parties.

 

         

(Dictated to the Stenographer in the open forum and pronounced on 16^th March 2018).

 

 

(ROOPA.N.R)     MEMBER

(S.L.PATIL)  PRESIDENT

                                                                        

1. Witness examined on behalf of the complainant/s by way of affidavit:

 

Sri.Prashanth.N, who being the complainant was examined. 

Copies of Documents produced on behalf of Complainant/s:

 

Ex-A1	Invoice
Ex-A2 to A4	Job sheets
Ex-A5 & A6	Email communications

 

 

 

 

(ROOPA.N.R)     MEMBER

(S.L.PATIL)  PRESIDENT