Orissa

Nabarangapur

CC/196/2015

Bichitra Nanda Swain - Complainant(s)

Versus

Z.Communication,Nabarangpur - Opp.Party(s)

22 Mar 2016

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, NABARANGPUR
Heading 2
 
Complaint Case No. CC/196/2015
( Date of Filing : 22 Dec 2015 )
 
1. Bichitra Nanda Swain
Gandhi Nagar
Nabarangpur
Odisha
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. Z.Communication,Nabarangpur
Nabarangpur
Odisha
2. Nokia Care, Nabarangpur
New Tank Street
Nabarangpur
Odisha
3. C.E.O., Microsoft Corporation Pvt Ltd, 10th floor Tower, B & C, DCF Building No.5 (Epitome), Cybercity, DLF Phase-3, Gurgaon
Gurgaon
Hariyana
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. LAXMI NARAYAN PADHY PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MR. ASWINI KUMAR MOHAPATRA MEMBER
 HON'BLE MRS. MEENAKHI PADHI MEMBER
 
For the Complainant:
For the Opp. Party:
Dated : 22 Mar 2016
Final Order / Judgement

MR LAXMI NARAYAN PADHI, PRESIDENT…             The facts of complaint in brief is that, the Complainant had procured a Mobile set Make Nokia 220, bearing IMEI No.354269063460813 & 354269063460805 on dated 05/10/2014 from OP.No-01 and paid an amount of Rs.2700/-. After purchase of six months, the mobile set appears serious problems like battery heat while charging, speaker problems, automatic switch on-off etc. The complainant approached the OP.1 & 2 on dt.25.06.15 and requested to redeem the same, but who returned the cell on the same days without any rectification but the OP.2 issued job sheet on demand and advised the complainant to contact the company as the set has some inherent problems. Hence the complainant under immense pressure inflicted great mental agony due to the substandard product of OP.s. Despite approaches, the OP.s highhandedly abstained to render service to the complainant. Hence the complainant craves the leave of this forum and seeking justice. Due to such illegal action of the OP.s, the Complainant inflicted great humility, monetary losses and mental agony. So he prayed to direct the OP.s to pay the price of the alleged product along with a sum of Rs.50,000/- as compensation and Rs.10,000/- towards cost of the litigation.

2.         On the other hand the OP.1 has filed his counter wherein except evasive denials specified nothing in contradiction to the complaint. The OP.2 & 3 neither appeared nor file any counter in spite of several chances given in three months of it’s admission. Hence the OP.2 & 3 are set ex parte as contemplated in Sec.13(2)(b) of the C.P.Act.1986. The complainant has filed cash invoice of the alleged mobile, service job sheet along with warranty card of the set. The complainant has been heard minutely the case at length, perused the record and submissions considered.

3.         The consumer protection act is a socio economic beneficial law, intended for speedy delivery of justice to the aggrieved and needy consumers and every complaint is supposed to be disposed off within a timeframe in consonance with the objects of the benevolent legislature, but inordinate delay in procurement of evidences and counter by the parties have emerged for reaching delirium to achievement of such objects.

4.         From the above submissions, it is found that the complainant has procured the mobile set on dt.05.10.2014 and the same became defect with in warranty period. As per conditions of warranty, the complainant approached the OP.s on dt.25.06.15 for necessary repair, but the OP.s neither could mend the set nor replaced with a new one despite requests. Considering the evidences, submissions by the complainant, we are of the view that, the mobile set purchased by the complainant has inherent defect and the OP.s failed to provide service to the complainant within warranty period. Thus the complainant sustained mental agony with the defective set, and also inflicted financial losses and valuable times due to the negligence and unfair practices of OP.s, hence under compulsion he file the instant case and prayed for compensation.

5.         From the above transactions it is noticed that, the OP.s despite service of notice of this forum are failed to take any initiations to settle the matter of complainant and there is nothing to disbelieve the contentions of complainant. Hence we feel that the action of OP.s is illegal and unfair which amounts to deficiency in service and found guilty under the provisions of the C.P.Act 1986, hence the complainant is entitled for relief. So the complaint is allowed against the OP.no.1 & 2 with costs.

O  R  D  E  R

i.          The opposite party no.2 & 3 supra are severally and collaterally directed to pay the price of the set Rs.2700/- (Two thousand & Seven hundred) only in place of the alleged defective one inter alia, to pay Rs.4,000/-(Four thousand) as compensation and a sum of Rs.1000/-(One thousand) towards the cost of litigation to the complainant.

ii.         The above directions shall be complied with in 30 days of this order, failing which, the total sum will bear 12% interest per annum till its realization. Pronounced on 22nd day of March' 2016.

 

 

MEMBER                              MEMBER                              PRESIDENT, DCDRF,

                                                                                                    NABARANGPUR.

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. LAXMI NARAYAN PADHY]
PRESIDENT
 
[HON'BLE MR. ASWINI KUMAR MOHAPATRA]
MEMBER
 
[HON'BLE MRS. MEENAKHI PADHI]
MEMBER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.