DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
SOUTH 24 – PARGANAS ,
AMANTRAN BAZAR, BARUIPUR, KOLKATA-700 0144
C.C. CASE NO. _10_ OF ___2017_
DATE OF FILING : 18.01.2017 DATE OF PASSING JUDGEMENT:01.08.2017
Present : President : Udayan Mukhopadhyay
Member(s) : Jhunu Prasad & Subrata Sarker
COMPLAINANT :Ankita Mondal, C/o Khokan Mondal , Vill.+P.O-Bagampur, P.S Baruipur, Dist. South 24-Parganas, Pin-743387.
-VERSUS -
O.P/O.Ps : 1. 003361806- Bhabya Infotech, 104A, Kulpi Road, Paddapukur, Kolkata – 700 144.
2. Mondal Communication & Repairing Centre, Katakhal, Baruipur, South 24-Parganas, Pin-743330
___________________________________________________________________
J U D G E M E N T
Jhunu Prasad, Lady Member
Claiming herself as Consumer under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 , the complainant Ankita Mondal has sought for interference of this Forum in respect of facts complained of.
The pith and substance of the complaint is that the complainant purchased one Samsung mobile being No. model J1 from Mondal communication and repairing centre at Katakhal, Baruipur 24 PGs (s).
Thereafter few months of using the said mobile phone became dead, though it was within the warranty period.
Thereafter on 30.09.2016 the complainant informed regarding the said dead mobile phone to the authorized service centre of the Samsung, but the authorized service centre refused to repair the same and informed that warranty period has already been over.
Hence, the complainant filed this instant complaint for getting relief as prayed for.
Issued notice upon the O.Ps.
Despite service of notice, neither the O.Ps appeared before the Forum to contest the case, nor filed any written version.
So, the instant case has been heard ex-parte against the O.Ps.
Points for Determination :-
1.Whether the complainant is a consumer ?
2. Was there any negligence or deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps?
3. Is the complainant entitled to get relief as prayed for?
Decision with Reasons:-
At the time of argument the complainant filed affidavit – in - chief, BNA and some Xerox copies of document to support her contention.
All points are taken up together for consideration for the sake of argument and brevity.
We have carefully considered the submission made before us by the complainant and critically perused all the materials on record, it is evident that, the complainant has purchased one Samsung mobile phone being Model No.J1 from O.P-2.
On scrutiny of the case record and relying upon the evidence and from the documents filed by the complainant it is also evident that after few months of using the mobile phone, it became dead and immediately the complainant went to the authorized service centre of Samsung to inform the matter and requested to repair the said defective mobile phone, but the O.P No.1, service centre of Samsung refused to repair the same as the warranty period of the said mobile phone has already been over.
But on critical appreciation of the case record and warranty filed by the complainant, we perused that the said dead mobile phone is within the warranty period. The O.Ps intentionally and deliberately ignored to repair the said mobile phone which tantamount to deficiency in service on the part of the O.P within the per view of section 2(1)(g) of C.P. Act 1986. Authorized service centre of Samsung mobile phone is duty bound to repair the same, when it is within warranty.
Moreover, all the allegations made by the complainant are unchallenged, though, the O.Ps got chance to contest and to refute the same by filing written version before the Forum, but the OP.s deliberately failed to do the same. Therefore, there are no reasons to disbelieve the unchallenged testimony of the complainant.
Therefore, in light of the analysis we are inclined to hold that the complainant is a “Consumer” under the O.Ps within the per view of section 2(1)(d) of the C.P. Act 1986 and successfully proved her case and is entitled to get relief as prayed for and consequently the points for determination are affirmative.
In short, the complainant deserves success.
In the result, we proceed to pass
ORDER
That the complainant be and the same is allowed ex-parte against the OPs. with cost of Rs.2,000/-
That the O.Ps are Jointly and severally directed to repair the said mobile phone within one month from the date of this order with full satisfaction of the complainant.
Failing which the O.Ps are jointly and severally also directed to refund the amount of Rs.6,200/- which has been paid by the complainant to the O.P. No. 2 as cost of the said mobile phone within one month from the date of this order.
That the O.Ps are jointly and severally also directed to pay of Rs.3,000/- as compensation and Rs.2,000/- as litigation cost to the complainant within one month from the date of this order.
In the event of non compliance of any portion of the executable order by the O.Ps within the above specified period, the O.Ps shall have to pay a sum of Rs.50/- as punitive damages per day from the date of this order till its realization, which shall be deposited by the O.Ps in the State Consumer Welfare Fund.
Let copies of the order be supplied to the parties free of cost when applied for.]
Member Member President
Dictated and corrected by me
Member
The judgment in separate sheet is ready and is delivered in open Forum. As it is ,
ORDER
That the complainant be and the same is allowed ex-parte against the OPs. with cost of Rs.2,000/-
That the O.Ps are Jointly and severally directed to repair the said mobile phone within one month from the date of this order with full satisfaction of the complainant.
Failing which the O.Ps are jointly and severally also directed to refund the amount of Rs.6,200/- which has been paid by the complainant to the O.P. No. 2 as cost of the said mobile phone within one month from the date of this order.
That the O.Ps are jointly and severally also directed to pay of Rs.3,000/- as compensation and Rs.2,000/- as litigation cost to the complainant within one month from the date of this order.
In the event of non compliance of any portion of the executable order by the O.Ps within the above specified period, the O.Ps shall have to pay a sum of Rs.50/- as punitive damages per day from the date of this order till its realization, which shall be deposited by the O.Ps in the State Consumer Welfare Fund.
Let copies of the order be supplied to the parties free of cost when applied for.]
Member Member President
