Punjab

Ludhiana

CC/15/266

Sukhdhir singh Sekhon - Complainant(s)

Versus

A.R.Mobile Store - Opp.Party(s)

received by post

30 Jun 2015

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, LUDHIANA.

 

                                                C.C.No.266 of 20.04.2015

                                                          Date of decision:30.06.2015 

Sukhdhir Singh Sekhon, r/o 45, Karnail Singh Nagar, Pakhowal Road, Ludhiana. 

                                                          ….Complainant.

                                       Versus  

                  

1.A.R.Mobile Store 329Z/2, Ishmeet Chowk, Model Town, Extension, Ludhiana.

2.Smart Solution Shop No.8, Last Building, Minerawa  Market, Near Mata Rani Chowk, Ludhiana.

                                                …Opposite parties

COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 12 OF THE

CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, 1986.

 

Quorum:    Sh. R.L.Ahuja, President.

                   Sh.Sat Paul Garg, Member.

                                     

Present:       Complainant Sh.Sukhdhir Singh Sekhon in person.

Ops ex-parte.

                                                ORDER

R.L.AHUJA, PRESIDENT.  

 

1.                Present complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 has been filed by Sh.Sukhdhir Singh Sekhon(hereinafter in short to be described as ‘Complainant’) against A.R.Mobile Store 329Z/2, Ishmeet Chowk, Model Town, Extension, Ludhiana and others(hereinafter in short to be described ‘Ops’), directing them to refund Rs.6500/- towards the price of the mobile alongwith Rs.20,000/- as compensation on account of mental pain and agony to the complainant and legal action be taken against the Ops.

2.                In brief, the case of the complainant is that on 13.01.2015, the complainant had purchased one mobile phone make of Panasonic Company from OP1. However, when the complainant using the same after its purchase, the same suffers from problem qua battery back and heating problem and the complainant lodged the complaint with OP1, who advised the complainant to approach OP2. On 16.1.2015, when the complainant approached with OP2 alongwith the aforesaid mobile phone, then OP2 told that IMEI is not found and asked the complainant to come back after four days, whereas, the complainant time and again asked that he has not kept the phone and to give him D.O.Letter as he suffers mental harassment on account of purchase of the said mobile phone. However, OP2 failed to give the D.O.Letter and also failed to provide other phone against the defective phone. When the complainant asked OP2 to give him Visitor Book, OP2 also failed to provide the same and also failed to fill up the service job sheet properly despite repeated demands made by the complainant. Despite repeated written complaints to the Ops, Ops failed to redressal the grievances of the complainant. Due to such act and conduct of Ops, the complainant has suffered a great mental tension and agony. Hence, this complaint.

3.                Notices of the complaint were sent to Ops, however, despite service, OP2 failed to appear and was proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 18.5.2015 by this Forum, whereas, OP1 failed to take the summon and as such, OP1 was proceeded against ex-parte vide order dt.05.06.2015 by this Forum.  

4.                In order to prove his case, the complainant tendered into evidence his affidavit as Ex.CA alongwith documents Ex.C1 & Ex.C2 and thereafter, closed his ex-parte evidence.

5.                We have heard the complainant in person and have very carefully perused the evidence on the file.

6.                Perusal of the record reveals that the complainant has placed on record his affidavit in the evidence as Ex.CA, in which, he has reiterated all the allegations made by him in the complaint. Further, the complainant has proved on record the documents Ex.C1 copy of Service Job Sheet dated 16.1.2015 issued by the OP2 mentioning the fault in the mobile qua Battery backup low and phone overheating problem and the same also bears the signature of complainant with the remarks that visitor book not given by the service centre and document Ex.C2 copy of retail invoice dated 13.1.2015 issued by OP1 to the complainant qua the purchase of the mobile in question by the complainant.

7.                Since, the OPs did not appear and contest the present complaint, so evidence adduced by the complainant goes unchallenged and unrebutted.

8.               From the allegations of the complainant as well as the evidence on record, it is apparently clear that complainant had purchased the mobile handset in question i.e. Panasonic T40 from OP1 vide invoice No.Rt-1030 dated 13.1.2013 which fact is evident from document Ex.C1 and the complainant had purchased the said mobile against the total sale consideration of Rs.6500/-. Further, it is proved fact on record that mobile in question was giving problem to the complainant qua the battery backup low and phone overheating problem, as a result of which, the complainant had approached OP2 on 16.1.2015 on the advise of OP1 for curing the defects of the same which fact is evident from the document Ex.C2 copy of Service Job Sheet which was duly issued by OP2 to the complainant, vide which, the problems as alleged in the complaint were duly reported. However, it is proved fact on record that the mobile of the complainant is within the warranty period. Further, as per the allegations of the complainant that he had made repeated request to the Ops to carry out the repair in the mobile. However, the same was not done as per his satisfaction.

9.                Since, it is proved on record that the OPs have failed to carry out the necessary repair in the mobile of the complainant despite his repeated requests and due to non working of the mobile of the complainant, the complainant has failed to use the mobile in question, which he had purchased for his personal use. Thus, Ops are proved to be deficient in rendering proper services.

10.              In view of the above discussion, by allowing this complaint, we direct OPs to carry out the necessary repair of the mobile of the complainant especially qua battery backup and heating problem and to make it proper functional to the entire satisfaction of the complainant by replacing the battery and other parts, if any, required without any costs or in the alternative, to replace the mobile set of the complainant with new one of the same make and model without any costs or in case, the same is not available, to make refund of the entire amount of mobile in question to the complainant and further, for causing sufferance and harassment to the complainant, OPs are directed to pay compensation and litigation expenses compositely assessed as Rs.1000/-(One thousand only) to the complainant on account of mental pain, agony and harassment suffered by him. Order be complied within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Copies of the order be sent to the parties free of cost and thereafter, file be consigned to the record room.

 

                 (Sat Paul Garg)                          (R.L.Ahuja)

                     Member                                   President 

Announced in Open Forum.

Dated:30.06.2015

Gurpreet Sharma