Date of Filling: 06.02.2017
Date of Disposal: 10.07.2018
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
THIRUVALLUR-1
PRESENT: THIRU.S.PANDIAN, B.Sc., L.L.M. ….PRESIDENT
THIRU:R.BASKARKUMARAVEL, B.Sc.L.L.M., BPT., PGDCLP., …MEMBER
CONSUMER COMPLAINT No.08/2017
TUESDAY, THE 10 DAY OF JULY 2018
P.Basker,
S/o Perumal,
No.1/30, Udaiyar Street,
Kattupakkam, Thiruvallur District,
Chennai -56 ….. Complainant.
//Verses//
1.Poorvika Mobiles (p)Ltd.,
Rep.by it Managing Director,
No.30, Arcot Road,
Kadambakkam, Chennai - 24.
2.Poorvika Mobiles (p)Ltd.,
Rep.by its Manager,
Branch Office at No.464, Trunk Road,
Kumananchavadi,
Thiruvallur District.
3.Gionee Care,
Rep.by its Manager,
No.142, First Floor,
Purasawalkam High Road,
Purasalwalkam Lumbini Square,
Chennai - 10.
4. The proprietor,
Global Communications,
No.459/465 First Floor,old MTH Road,
Chennai -53. ……Opposite parties.
This complaint is coming upon before us finally on 02.07.2018 in the presence of Thiru.S.Muthu kumaravel, Counsel for the Complainant and 1to4 Opposite parties are set Exparte for non appearance and upon hearing the arguments, having perused the documents, evidences, written and oral arguments of the Complainant, this Forum delivered the following.
ORDER
PRONOUNCED BY THIRU.S.PANDIAN, PRESIDENT
This Complaint has been preferred by the Complainant Under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act,1986 against the Opposite Parties for refund a sum of Rs.15,000/- towards price of the mobile phone and a sum of Rs.50,000/-towards compensation for causing mental agony and financial loss due to the deficiency of service and sum of Rs.35,000/- towards unfair trade practice and with cost.
2. The brief averments of the complaint as follows:-
In the month of November 2016, the complainant opted to purchase a new mobile with 4G facility so that his work will be much easier because of speed. On 19.11.2016 the complainant went to the 2nd opposite party shop and has purchased Gionee Mobile-P7 Max for a sum of Rs.15,000/- vide invoice No.SI/KUMN/17810 dated 19.00.2016. That within a month from the date of purchase the mobile has some defects like the mobile will hang for some time, during that time the complainant will not be able to make a call and unable to use the mobile and unable to take photos of customer its, when the incoming call was attended then the phone get hanged and the voice will be cut down, this has annoyed the complainant. So on 02.01.2017, the complainant has handed over the mobile to the 2nd opposite party, based upon the same, the 2nd opposite party has endorsed in the bill itself and in the next day 03.01.2017 the 2nd opposite party has handed over the mobile stated that the defect is repaired. But within two days from repairing the mobile from the 2nd opposite party, the mobile got hanged. So, once again on 08.01.2017 the mobile was handed over by the complainant to the 2nd opposite party for repair and the same was endorsed by the 2nd opposite party in the bill itself.
3. That, after two weeks, the 2nd opposite party has stated that the mobile is not in a repairing position and directed the complainant to get the new mobile with the very same company. The complainant refused to accept the same and from the beginning the complainant requested the 2nd opposite party to provide the new mobile with some other company but the 2nd opposite party has refused to do so. The 2nd opposite party act is a clear case of unfair trade practice causing enormous mental agony to the complainant, based upon the 2nd opposite party’s assurance alone the complainant has purchased the Gionee Company Mobile otherwise he would have opted for some other regular brand. The act of the 2nd opposite party refusing to honor the complainant when he has paid Rs.15.000/- has a genuine customer and is also a gross deficiency in service. Hence this complaint.
4. In spite of notice send to the opposite parties and sufficient opportunities given the opposite parties have not chosen to appear before this Forum and hence they were set-Exparte.
5. On the side of the complainant, the complainant filed Proof Affidavit as his evidence in order to substantiate his case and Exhibit A1 to A3 are marked on his side.
6. At this Juncture, the points for determination before this forum are as follows:-
- Whether there is any deficiency in service on the side of the opposite parties as narrated in the complainant?
- Whether the complainant is entitled for any relief as prayed for?
7. Written Arguments filed by the complainant and also the oral Arguments adduced on the side of the complainant.
8. In such circumstances, this Forum decided to conclude this matter fully on merits with available evidence and documents putforth before this Forum, though the Opposite parties are set Exparte.
Point No:1:-
9. As per the averment of the complaint, the complainant had proposed to purchase a new mobile with 4G facility on 19.11.2016 from the 2nd opposite party and on the inducement of the 2nd opposite party, the complainant had purchased Gionee Mobile -97 Max for a sum of Rs.15,000/- and get hanged and thereafter handed over the said Mobile the 2nd opposite party for repair for two times and eventhen the said mobile was not repaired for working condition. It is further learnt that inspite of sending notice to the opposite parties but they failed to comply demand by the complainant and hence thereby the complainant compelled to file this complaint.
10. At the outset, this Forum has to be taken into consideration is as to whether the complainant has proved the allegations made against the opposite party by means of relevant and consistent evidence since it is the duty of the complainant. First of all, on perusal of the evidence of the complainant, it is stated that on 19.11.2016 the complainant went to the 2nd opposite party shop and intended to purchase a branded mobile like Apple or Sony but the 2nd opposite party has induced the complainant to purchase the Gionee Mobile for more than 20minutes and therefore the complainant had purchased the Gionee Mobile for Rs.15,000/- by means of Ex.A1 the invoice cum delivery chellan which is marked as Ex.A1. Thereafter within a month of the date of purchase the mobile some get hanged and the voice will be cut down and so, on 02.01.2017, the complainant has handed over the mobile to the 2nd opposite party, based upon the same the 2nd opposite party has endorsed in the bill itself and on 03.01.2017 the 2nd opposite party has handed over the mobile stated that the defect is repaired but, within two days the said mobile got hanged once again and hence, on 08.01.2017the mobile was handed over by the complainant to the 2nd opposite party and for which, it is endorsed by the 2nd opposite party in Ex.A1 itself. It is further seen from the evidence that after two weeks the 2nd opposite has stated that the mobile is not in a repairing position and directed the complainant to get the new mobile with the same company but the complainant refused to accept the same and the complainant requested to provide the new mobile with some other company but for which the 2nd opposite party has refused to do so. Therefore, the complainant issued the notice which is marked as Ex.A2 and the same was received by the 2nd opposite party through Ex.A3(s) acknowledgement card. From the above evidence, it is crystal that the complainant purchased the mobile from the 2nd opposite party and got repaired the mobile and handed over the two times to the 2nd opposite party for necessary repair but the 2nd opposite party had failed to repair the said mobile and further stated that the said mobile is not repairing position and directed the complainant to get the new mobile with the same company.
11. At this juncture there is no dispute that the said mobile as new one purchased by the complainant from the 2nd opposite party and within a one month it got repaired that is within a warranty period. The defect could not be rectified by the 2nd opposite party which clearly reveals that there is no manufacturing defect in the mobile which need not required the accepted upon. Even thereafter, issue of notice to the opposite parities, the opposite parties did not come forward either to repair the said mobile or to comply the demand of the complainant. Therefore, it is crystal clear that the act of the opposite party amount to deficiency of service as alleged in the complaint. The 2nd opposite party is authorized dealer of the Poorvika Mobiles private limited.
12. In such circumstances, in spite of notice sent through this Forum after filing of this complaint before this Forum and on the same were duly served to the opposite parties 1to 4, they neither appeared nor represented through his counsel before this Forum and hence, they were set Ex-parte. Also , the opposite parties has not come forward to rebut the evidence produced on the side of the complainant. It clearly shows that there is no valid reasons or ground on the side of the opposite parties1to4 to deny the deficiency of service committed by the opposite party. Thus, point no.1 is answered accordingly.
Point No.2:-
13. As per the conclusion arrived in point No.1, it is crystal clear that the complainant is entitled for the refund of Rs.15,000/- being the price of the mobile phone with reasonable interest and reasonable compensation for having suffered mental agony and financial loss due to the deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties and with reasonable cost. Thus, point No.2 is answered accordingly.
In the result, this complaint is allowed in part. Accordingly, the opposite parties1to4 are jointly and severally liable to refund a sum of Rs.15,000/- (Fifteen thousand only) being the price of the mobile phone purchased by the complainant with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of complaint i.e. (06.02.2017) till the date of this order (10.07.2018) and to pay a compensation of Rs.5,000/-(Five Thousand only) for causing mental agony and financial loss due to the deficiency of service and unfair trade practice on the side of the opposite parties and cost of Rs.3,000/-(Three thousand only) towards litigation expenses.
The above amount shall be payable within one month from the date of receipt of the copy of the order, failing which, the said amount shall carry interest at the rate of 9% per annum till the date of payment.
Dictated by the president to the Steno-Typist, transcribed and computerized by him, corrected by the president and pronounced by us in the open Forum of this 10th July 2018.
-Sd- -Sd-
MEMBER PRESIDENT
List of documents filed by the complainant:-
Ex.A1 | 19.11.2016 | Invoice Bill with back side endorsements | Xerox |
Ex.A2 | 13.01.2017 | Notice sent by the complainant to the op2 | Xerox |
Ex.A3 | ……. | Postal Acknowledgement card. | Original |
-Sd- -Sd-
MEMBER PRESIDENT
