Haryana

Sonipat

318/2014

KULDEEP SINGH S/O SHRI PAL SINGH - Complainant(s)

Versus

1. M/S TARASH OVERSEAS PVT. LTD.,2. SPICE RETAILS LIT.,3. M/S SPICE MOBILITY LTD. - Opp.Party(s)

SACHIN MALIK

05 Jan 2015

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SONEPAT.

                                           

                             Complaint No.318 of 2014

                             Instituted on:21.11.2014

                             Date of order:06.05.2015

 

Kuldeep Singh son of Shripal Singh, resident of village Barwasni, Distt. Sonepat.

     …….Complainant

 

                   VERSUS

 

1.M/s Tarash Overseas Pvt. Ltd., plot no.5, Sector 27, near SSR Corporate Tower, Faridabad.

2.Spice retail limited, authorized service centre, star enterprises, Shop no.G-2, City Plaza, near Axis Bank, Mama Bhanja Chowk, Sonepat.

3.M/s Spice Mobility Ltd., S Global Knowledge Park, 19A and 19B, Sector 125, Noida 201301 UP.

        ……..Respondents.

         

COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 12 OF

THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,1986

 

Argued by: Shri Sachin Malik, Adv. for complainant.         

           Sh.Joginder Kuhar, Adv. for respondent no.2 & 3.

           Respondent no.1 ex-parte.

 

BEFORE-   Nagender Singh, President.

          Smt. Prabha Wati, Member.

          D.V. Rathi, Member.

 

O R D E R

 

       Complainant has filed the present complaint against the respondents alleging therein that he has purchased one mobile set of Spice company  through home shopping on 16.2.2014 worth Rs.10,000/-. But the said mobile phone has started problems in July, 2014.  The complainant visited to the respondent no.2, but till date no solution has been provided by the respondents.  The above said mobile is lying deposited with the respondents since 7.10.2014 and that amounts to a grave deficiency in service on the part of the respondents. So, he has come to this Forum and has filed the present complaint.

2.       In the present case, only the respondent no.3 has filed the written statement, whereas respondent no.1 was proceeded against ex-parte.

         The respondents no.3 in their written statement has submitted that the respondent no.3 has no idea about the conversation held between the complainant and respondent no.2.  As per terms and conditions of the company, if there is any defect in handset within warranty period, then ASC will resolve defects in the handset.  All the allegations made by the complainant are totally baseless.  There is no deficiency in service on the part of the respondent no.3 and thus, prayed for the dismissal of the present complaint.

3.       We have heard the complainant and learned counsel for the respondent no.1 length and have also gone through the entire case file very carefully.

4.       Ld. Counsel for the respondent no.3 has submitted that the respondent no.3 has no idea about the conversation held between the complainant and respondent no.2.  As per terms and conditions of the company, if there is any defect in handset within warranty period, then ASC will resolve defects in the handset.  All the allegations made by the complainant are totally baseless.  There is no deficiency in service on the part of the respondent no.3.

         We have perused the entire relevant record available on the case file very carefully.

         There is no dispute with regard to the fact that the complainant has purchased the mobile set of the respondent no.3 company.  The complainant has produced Annexure C2 copy of written request and copy of job sheet Annexure C3, C4 and C5 and all these job sheets totally speaks against the respondents and are sufficient to prove that the mobile set of the complainant was defective.  Accordingly, it is held that the complainant has been able to prove his case against the respondents and thus, we hereby direct the respondents to refund Rs.10,000/- (Rs.ten thousands) to the complainant.            

         If the mobile set is in the possession of the respondents, in that event, the complainant shall return only the accessories of the mobile set to the respondents.  And If the mobile set is in the possession of the complainant, in that event, the complainant shall return the mobile set alongwith its accessories to the respondents.

         With these observations, findings and directions, the present complaint stands allowed.

         Certified copies of order be provided to the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record-room.

 

 

(Prabha Devi-Member)    (D.V.Rathi)         (Nagender Singh-President)

DCDRF, Sonepat.      DCDRF, Sonepat.      DCDRF Sonepat.

 

Announced 06.05.2015