BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, MYSORE-570023

CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO.302/2017

DATED ON THIS THE 13^th April 2018

      Present:  1) Sri. H.M.Shivakumara Swamy

B.A., LLB., - PRESIDENT   

                     2) Sri. Devakumar.M.C.                  

                                                B.E., LLB., PGDCLP   - MEMBER

Sri H.M.SHIVAKUMARA SWAMY,

   President

1. This complaint is filed for a direction to the opposite party to pay sum Rs 61,600/- with cost and other relief.
2.  The brief facts alleged in the complaint are: that on 05.04.2016 complainant purchased Mobile phone from the opposite party no.2 for Rs. 9,600/-. About 3 and 4 months later the batter power of the said phone is use to discharge within 4-5 minutes, even after fully charged the same. The complainant approached the opposite party no.3 service centre for repair in the month of October-2016. opposite party no.3  simply serviced the mobile and return the same, again in the month of August -2017, again there is problem in phone then opposite party no.3 has charged Rs. 250/- towards the service charge. But same day there is problem hence the same was again returned to opposite party no.3 which was not properly attended. Hence this complaint is filed.
3. All the three opposite parties serviced with notice and absent, placed exparte.
4. During evidence , complainant filed his affidavit and relied on documents,  further evidence closed.  After hearing arguments, this matter is set down for orders.

5. The points arose for our consideration are:-

1. Whether the complaint establishes that there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties, in not properly attending repair of the mobile purchased by complainant, thereby complainant is entitled for the reliefs?
2.  What order?

6.    Our findings on the aforesaid points are as follows:

Point No.1 :- Partly in the Affirmative.

Point No.2 :- As per final order for the following

:: R E A S O N S ::

7.    Point No.1:-  To establish the deficiency of service on  the part of opposite party, complainant filed his affidavit evidence, reiterating allegations made in the complaint his evidence is on 05.04.2016 he purchased mobile from opposite party no.2 manufactured by opposite party no.1 for Rs. 9,600/-. Subsequently there is problem in battery power thereby complainant approached  opposite party no.3 service centre in the month of October 2016. Opposite party no.3 has return the same, but there is again problem in August 2017, it was return to the complainant, again there is same problem, hence complainant approached by opposite party no.3 for repair on 06.09.2017. Thereafter opposite party no.3 failed to retuned the handset. Hence this complainant filed, the complainant sought on order against all the opposite parties.

8.    From  evidence on recorded it is clear that on 11.08.2017 the phone was handover to opposite party no.3 with the problem in battery power back up, again the opposite party no.3 received the phone on 06.09.2017 and issued letter to the complainant. thereafter the opposite party no.3 neither attended the repair nor returned the phone. Hence the complainant alleges there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite party no.3. and opposite party no.1 is the manufacture it is service centre opposite party no.3 is liable to answer claim with opposite party no.1 complainant is entitle for the actual cost of Rs. 9,600/- with compensation of Rs. 10,000/- and litigation expenses of Rs. 2,000/- . Hence, point No.1 is answered  Partly in the affirmative.

9.   Point No.2:- In view of the findings recorded on point No.1,    opposite party no .2 is only  a dealer,  thereby there is no liability on his part. Only opposite party no.1 being the manufacture, opposite party no .3 being service centre are jointly severally  liable to refund the cost of mobile i.e., Rs. 6,900/- with interest and also they are liable to pay compensation of Rs. 10,000/- and 2,000/- towards litigation expenses to the complainant. Hence, we pass the following order:-

:: O R D E R ::

1. The complaint is hereby allowed in part.
2. The Opposite party no .1 and 3 are jointly and severally hereby directed to refund Rs. 9,600/-  being the cost mobile with interest at 18% p.a from the date of complainant i.e., 13.10.2017 till payment.
3. The Opposite party no.1 and 3 are jointly and severally hereby directed to pay of Rs. 10,000/-compensation and Rs. 2,000/- towards litigation expenses to the complainant within 30 days of this order, failing which the said sum of Rs. 12,000/- shall carry interest at 12% p.a from the date of complainant i.e., 13.10.2017till payment.
4.  The complainant against opposite party no.2 is dismissed.
5. In case of default to comply this order, the opposite party no.1 and 3 to undergo imprisonment and also liable for fine under section 27 of the C.P.Act, 1986.

6. Give the copies of this order to the parties, as per Rules

(Dictated to the Stenographer transcribed, typed by her, transcript corrected by us and then pronounced in open court on this the 13^th April 2018)

                          (H.M.SHIVAKUMARA SWAMY) 

                                      PRESIDENT     

                               (DEVAKUMAR.M.C.)

                                       MEMBER