Date of Filing : 25.07.2012

  Date of Order : 24.11.2012

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KOLAR

Dated 24^th NOVEMBER 2012

PRESENT

Sri. J.N. HAVANUR, B.Sc., LLB (SPL)             …….                PRESIDENT

Smt. K.G.SHANTALA, B.A., LLB                     ……..     MEMBER

CC No. 89 / 2012

Sri. Bhuvanesh.M.

S/o. Munivenkategowda,

Aged about 34 years,

R/at: Dodda Ayyur Village,

Thyavanahalli Post,

Kolar Taluk.                                                            ……. Complainant

V/s.

Sri. Rajesh,

Aged about 27 years,

Proprietor,

Karbonn Care, Near Santhe Gate,

Noor E- Madeen Building, M.B. Road,

Kolar.                                                                   …… Opposite Party

ORDER

By Smt. K.G. SHANTALA, MEMBER

The Complainant has filed the above Complaint against the OP seeking expenses of Rs.3,000/-, Conveyance charges and loss of income (profession) of Rs.20,000/- during the visit to OP shop, new Battery, new Cell cost, compensation for mental and physical agony, in total Rs.54,509/- with 18% interest along with costs and damages, litigation expenses of Rs.5,000/- and to deliver the hand-set to him.

2.       The Complainant filed Affidavit reiterating the facts stated in the complaint.  Brief facts:-

From the pleadings and documents filed by the Complainant, it can be inferred that the Complainant had allegedly purchased a Mobile on 05.06.2011 from one “Vybhav Enterprises, Bangalore” for Rs.3,000/-.  Since there was a problem in the Cell Phone, Complainant approached the OP for necessary repair and OP replaced new battery by taking cost of Rs.509/- vide Bill dtd. 04.06.2012.  After 2 days, the same problem arose.  On 06.06.2012, the Complainant approached the OP for service and the OP gave Declaration Slip and asked the Complainant to collect his Cell Phone after one day. When the Complainant went to the OP on the said day, the OP did not return him his Cell Phone, but kept on postponing on one pretext or the other.  The Complainant being resident of Dodda Ayyur Village situated in Kolar Taluk, made several visits to OP shop by incurring petrol expenses, but the OP failed to give the Complainant his new battery.  Finally on 28.06.2012, the OP refused to return the Complainant’s Cell Phone and pretended that the Complainant was not known to the OP due to which the Complainant suffered mentally and physically and was forced to purchase a new Cell Phone.  The complainant got issued a legal notice on 29.06.2012, but the OP did not care to reply to the said notice and the Complainant was compelled to file the above Complaint.

3.       On filing of Complaint, notice was issued to the OP.  Although notice was duly served, OP chose to remain absent throughout the proceedings.

4.       The Complainant has in all produced 3 documents as follows:

(1)     Purchase Bill dtd. 05.06.2011 for Rs.3,000/- issued by Vybhav Enterprises, Bangalore.

(2)     Cash / Credit Bill dtd. 04.06.2012 for Rs.509/- issued by Karbonn Care, M/s. Vybhav Mobile Corner, Kolar.

(3)     Declaration Slip dtd. 06.06.2012 issued by Karbonn Care, M.B. Road, Kolar.

The 1^st document relates to purchase of Mobile set, 2^nd document relates to purchase of a new battery and the 3^rd document relates to the alleged transaction for which the cause of action has arisen to file the above complaint.  The Declaration Slip issued by the OP herein is proof that the Complainant had handed over his Cell Phone to OP and the fact that the Complainant has produced the said Declaration Slip before this Forum is further proof that his Cell Phone is still in the custody / possession of the OP.  On the assurance of the OP that the Cell Phone would be repaired in one day’s time, the complainant with bonafide intention has handed over his Mobile set to the OP on 06.06.2012.  When he approached the OP on the next day, his Mobile set was not repaired as promised, but several more times the Complainant was forced to visit the OP’s Shop, but all went in vain, until to his horror, one day the OP flatly refused to identify the Complainant and to return him Cell phone.  The Complainant approached the OP to avail OP’s service i.e., to repair his Cell Phone.  Thereby he is a consumer under OP.

5.       The Declaration Slip reads as follows:

“Karbonn Care Centre will try to repair the handset whose details are given above but no assurance can be given about the functioning of the handset after attempting a repair by doing proper service / software upgrade or the set which is working partially may not work at all after service / software upgrade.” 

Even assuming that the terms contained in the Declaration Slip may exempt the OP from not carrying out satisfactory repair of the Mobile, however, Declaration does not empower the OP to retain the Mobile Set indefinitely.  This act of OP is high-handed and amounts to deficiency of service.  The OP ought to have carried out repair on the Mobile set within reasonable time and returned it safely.  But, the OP has failed to carry out repair of Mobile Set and failed to return the set to the Complainant even after a lapse of 5 months.  The OP is guilty of deficiency of service.  Hence, we proceed to pass the following:

ORDER

The Complaint is partly allowed. 

The OP shall pay to the Complainant Rs.3,000/- towards cost of Cell Phone, Rs.509/- i.e,. cost of new Battery and Rs.1,000/- towards legal expenses within 15 days from the date of this Order failing which he shall pay interest @ 10% on Rs.3,509/- from the date of Order till the date of payment.

Supply free copy of the Order to both the parties.

(Dictated to the Stenographer, got it transcribed and corrected and pronounced in the open Forum on this the 24^th day of November 2012)

K.G.SHANTALA                                   J.N. HAVANUR

        Member                                       President

SSS