DIST. CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESAL COMMISSION
NORTH 24 Pgs., BARASAT.
C.C. No.108/2018
Date of Filing: Date of Admission: Date of Disposal:
14.03.2018 21.03.2018 13.04.2023
Complainant/s:- | Jaya Podder, W/o. Arun Podder, Bankim Pally, P.S. and P.O. Barasat, Dist- North 24 Parganas, Pin-700124. = Vs |
Opposite Party/s: | 1.The Manager, New S.S. Telecom, 57/A, North Jessore Road, Champadali, Barasat, P.S. Barasat, Dist- North 24 Parganas, Kolkata-124. 2.The Manager, Intex Technologies( India) Ltd, C/o. Mobi Link, 5/1, P.D.G. Sarani Hijal Puriqa, Habra Swraj Complex-7743263, Habra, P.S. Habra, Dist- North 24 Parganas. |
P R E S E N T :- Smt. Sukla Sengupta…………………President
:- Smt. Monisha Shaw ……………… Member.
:- Sri. Abhijit Basu …………… ... Member.
JUDGMENT/FINAL ORDER
The complainant filed this case U/S 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
The brief fact of the case is as follows:-
The complainant purchased one Intex Mobile phone being Model No. Intex Aqua. HD 5.0 on 04.09.2017 for Rs. 7,999/-from O.P. No.1 with warranty of 12 months from the date of purchase. From the next day the complainant observed that there is some problems over the said purchased phone such as some problems, screen touch problem and charging related problem and the said problems was informed to the O.P. No.1. On 13.10.2017 the complainant informed O.P. No.2 about the said problem / defects. O.P. No.2received the charging head with cable of said mobile with remarks ‘out of warranty’ and claimed Rs. 236/- for mobile charger and compelling circumstance on 26.10.2017 complainant requested in writing before O.P. No.1 to change the said mobile with a new one of current 4G set according to the bill dated 04.09.2017 but O.P. No.1 did not give any response. Compelling circumstances complainant lodged a complain before Assistant Director, C.A. and F.B.P, Barrackpore for mediation but in vain. Hence complainant filed this case before this commission for redressal. Complainant filed this case within pecuniary and territorial jurisdiction of this commission hence this commission has ample power to try this case. Complainant filed this case for unfair trade practice.
Contd. To Page No. 2 . . . ./
: : 2 : :
C.C. No.108/2018
The O.P filed the W/V admitted the purchase of the phone and warranty period but trying to shift the responsibility upon the O.P. No.2.
Now issue is whether the case is maintainable or not and whether the complainant is entitled to get relief or not.
The O.P. No.2 is not appeared before this commission even after received the notice. The O.P. No.1 is also not appeared since 23.08.2022.
Decision with Reasons
Considering the facts and circumstances as well as nature and character of this case all the points are interlinked to each other and as such all the points are taken up together for consideration for the sake of brevity and convenience.
On perusal material of case record, complaint, documents filed by the complainant, written version by O.P. No.1and other documents filed by O.P. No.1 as well as argument by the complainant, it is revealed that the complainant purchased one mobile phone being model No. Intex Aqua HD 5.0 on 04.09.2017 for Rs. 7,999/- from O.P. No.1 with an warranty of 12 months from the date of purchase. The advocate for complainant submits that in all mobile program system made inbuilt such a way that from the date and time of inserting SIM card shall count the date of use of mobile from that day and in the instant case after selling the mobile from the next date of defects started and within one month the service center declared ‘out of warranty’. Therefore it proves that the O.P sold the mobile which was used and/ or insert SIM card earlier before sale the mobile. This kind of sell would be treated as unfair trade practice. The phone started problem from the next day on 13.10.2017 complainant informed the O.P. No.2 about the defects and O.P. No.2 received the charging head with cable of the said mobile with remarks ‘out of warranty’ and claimed Rs. 236= 80 for mobile charges.
As the O.P sold the mobile out of warranty period hence O.P. No.1 is absolutely liable for the same.
From the report of authorized workshop/ service center it was reported that warranty status is out of warranty and in warranty card it is revealed that Intex Mobile Phone carries 12 months warranty from the date of purchase and 15 months from manufacturing date of corresponding MEI No of the Unit, whichever earlier is warranted, against defect in material, or workmanship. In this case the opposite party sold the phone. The authorized workshop reported that the warranty period is over hence the O.P. No.1 ought to return the mobile set to the manufacturer but he did not did his duty. In spite of that the O.P. No.1 sold the mobile set with a warranty for 12 months after expiry or 15 months from the date of manufacture which is bad in law and unfair trade practice.
Contd. To Page No. 3 . . . ./
: : 3 : :
C.C. No.108/2018
Considering the facts and circumstances of the above case and perused all documents, here complainant is a consumer as per Consumer Protection Act and O.Ps are service provider but O.P. No.1 did not provide his service and made unfair trade practice which is deficiency of service. Hence O.P. No.1is liable for deficiency of service and unfair trade practice. It is proved that the complainant his case, he is entitled to get relief.
Hence,
it is ordered,
that the instant case being No. 108/2018 be and the same is allowed with contest and ex-parte against O.P. No. 2.
The O.P. No.1 is directed to replace the said mobile with a new one current 4G set according to the bill dated 04.09.2017 providing warranty card with Rs. 2,000/- for harassment. Alternatively O.P. No.1 is directed to refund of Rs. 7,999/- with interest of Rs. 9% p.a. from 04.09.2017 till recovery with Rs. 2,000/- for harassment, within two months from the date of this judgment. Failing which the complainant has liberty to file execution case as per law.
Let plain copy of this order be given to the parties free of cost as per CPR, 2005.
Dictated & Corrected by me
Member
Member Member President
