This C.C. is coming on before us for final hearing in the presence of Sri Annarapu Venkateswarlu, Advocate for the complainant and of Sri Yedunuthala Srinivasa Rao & Smt.Y.Anuradha, Advocates for opposite party no.1; Notice for opposite party No.2 served and called absent; Notice to opposite party no.3 refused; upon perusing the material papers on record; upon hearing the arguments and having stood over for consideration this forum passed the following:
ORDER
(Per Sri R. Kiran Kumar, FAC President)
This complaint is filed u/s.12-A of Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The averments made in the complaint are that the complainant had purchased Karbonn Mobile Phone, Model No.K446 vide its IMEI No.91000210024194741945, Battery No. Sl.No:K446KO90009666, charger Sl.No.0909041915 on 15-02-2009 for Rs.4,100/- vide cash receipt No.60, dt.15-12-2009 from the opposite party No.1. The new Karbonn mobile phone K446, the first two months it was good in function, after that it starts giving problems in operating system. Immediately the complainant informed the same to the opposite party No.1, thereby on the advise of the opposite party No.1 the complainant approached the opposite party No.2 Service Center in Khammam. The complainant further submitted that the technician of opposite party no.2 attended on the handset and found that there is some problem in the main board and also there were other problems, the opposite party No.2 kept the mobile in the service center by saying to approach after ten days. The complainant further submitted that accordingly the complainant approached the opposite party no.2 service center at Khammam and requested to rectify the problem permanently or otherwise replace the handset. But they failed to do so, even they failed to give proper reply in spite of made many rounds to the service center by the complainant. The complainant further submitted that he is a technician in S.C Co. Ltd., Manuguru, due to non-working of the said handset he is suffering mental agony. As such the complainant is claiming to replace the handset with the new one or to pay the bill amount of Rs.4,100/- apart from damages of Rs.15,000/- for causing physical and mental agony.
2. On behalf of the complainant the following documents were filed and marked as Exhibits A1 to A8.
Ex.A1:- Cash bill No.4,100/- dt.15-12-2009 issued by opposite party no.1
Ex.A2:- Endorsement made by the opposite party no.1, “Phone maintenance
received”, dt.14-05-2010.
Ex.A3:- Warranty Card of Karbonn handset.
Ex.A4:- User guide of Karbonn handset of opposite party No.3.
Ex.A5:- Office copy of legal notice, dt.05-10-2010.
Ex.A6:- Postal receipts (Nos.3)
Ex.A7:-Postal acknowledgements(Nos.2) dt.06-10-2010, served on
opposite party No.1&2.
Ex.A8: Returned unserved cover, addressed to opposite party no.3.
3. On receipt of the notice, the opposite party No.1 appeared through their counsel and counter not filed.
4. On behalf of the opposite parties No documents were filed.
[
5. Upon perusing the material papers on record, now the point that arose for consideration are,
- Whether the complainant is entitled for the claim?
- To what relief?
Point No.1:-
In this case the complainant purchased Karbonn mobile phone from the opposite party No.1 for an amount of Rs.4,100/- on 15-02-2009. The first two months the mobile phone was good in function and after it starts giving problem in operating system. Immediately the complainant informed the same to the opposite party No.1 and on the advice of opposite party No.1, he approached the opposite party No.2. The technician of opposite party No.2 attended on the handset and found that there is some problem in main board and rectified the same. Then after also the mobile phone giving same problem, the complainant approached the opposite party No.2 service center and requested to rectify the problem permanently or otherwise replace the same with new one. But the opposite parties failed to rectify the problem permanently. As such the complainant approached the forum for redressal.
That as per the complainant, when the mobile starts giving problems in operating system, immediately he informed the same to the opposite party no.1, on the advice of opposite party no.1, complainant approached the opposite party no.2 service station at Khammam. The technician of opposite party no.2 attended on the handset and found that there is a problem in main board and asked to kept the same with them. After that the opposite party no.2 failed to rectify the problem and also failed to handover the handset to the complainant. From the above we observed that the mobile sold by the opposite party having manufacturing defect particularly with regard to main board and having other problems. But the opposite parties failed to rectify the same and also failed to return the mobile. And also observed that the opposite party failed to produce any evidence to disprove the contention of the complainant. From the above we observed that there is deficiency of service on the part of opposite parties and this point is answered accordingly in favour of the complainant.
Point No.2:-
In the result, the complaint is allowed directing the opposite parties no.1 to 3, to replace the mobile with new one or to refund the cost of the mobile i.e. Rs.4,100/- (Rupees Four Thousand and One Hundred only) to the complainant within one month failing which the amount shall carry interest @9% p.a. from the date of receipt of this order and further directed to pay Rs.500/- (Rupees Five Hundred only) towards damages and costs of the litigation.
Dictated to steno, transcribed by her, corrected and pronounced by us in the open forum, on this 29th day of January, 2013
FAC PRESIDENT MEMBER
DISTRIC CONSUEMR FORUM, KHAMMAM
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
Witnesses examined for complainant: None
Witnesses examined for opposite parties: None
Exhibits marked for Complainant:-
Ex.A1:- Cash bill No.4,100/- dt.15-12-2009 issued by opposite party no.1
Ex.A2:- Endorsement made by the opposite party no.1, “Phone maintenance
received”, dt.14-05-2010.
Ex.A3:- Warranty Card of Karbonn handset.
Ex.A4:- User guide of Karbonn handset of opposite party No.3.
Ex.A5:- Office copy of legal notice, dt.05-10-2010.
Ex.A6:- Postal receipts (Nos.3)
Ex.A7:-Postal acknowledgements(Nos.2) dt.06-10-2010, served on
opposite party No.1&2.
Ex.A8: Returned unserved cover, addressed to opposite party no.3.
Exhibits marked for opposite parties:
- Nil -
FAC PRESIDENT MEMBER
DISTRIC CONSUEMR FORUM, KHAMMAM
