DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM, BOLANGIR
Presents:-
1 Sri A.K.Purohit, President
2 Smt. S.Rath, Member.
Dated, Bolangir the 03th day of September’ 2018
C.C. No. 05 of 2018
Keshaba Sahu, S/o- Bhagabana Sahu, aged about 26 years
Occupation Cultivation, Resident of village/Po- Bolangir Sadar,
District- Bolangir
-Versue-
Amarchan Agrawal, Proprietor of Shree Balaji Mobiles,
Gopalji Road Bolangir Town, Po- Bolangir, Ps- Bolangir Town
District- Bolangir
Adv. For the Complainant: - Sri K.C.Mishra
Adv. For O.P :- None
Date of filing of the Case :- 18.01.2018
Date of Order :- 03.09.2018
JUDGMENT
Sri A.K.Purohit, President
1. The case of the complainant is that, he had purchased a YU-5010a-Yuphoria-2/16/5/8MP mobile handset from the O.P. on dated 16.2.2017 for a consideration of Rs. 6,300/- vide invoice No. 230 dated 16.2.2017. The complainant alleges that from the very date of its purchase the complainant found defect in the net work section of the mobile, to which he had complained before the O.P. and as per the advice of the Customer Care he had availed the service of the authorized service center of the manufacturer, but the defect was not removed by the service center. On the other hand after service the mobile was found dead on dated 30.4.2017. As the O.P. did not provide a defect free service to the complainant nor has taken any step for resolution of the issue the complainant has preferred this case before this Forum for redressal.
2. Although notice has been served on the O.P. neither he appears nor has filed his version and hence he was set expert vide order dated 21.6.18.
3. Heard the complainant. Perused the invoice dated 16.2.17 issued by the O.P. It is a fact that the complainant had purchased a YU-5010a-Yuphoria-2/16/5/8mp mobile hand set from the O.P. and paid the price of Rs.6,300/- on the same date. It is seen from the complaint petition supported by an affidavit that, from the very beginning of its purchase the said mobile was found defective and lastly it was found dead. There is no evidence available on record to show that the said mobile was repaired without defect by the service center of the manufacturer. Therefore it is evident from the material available on record that the mobile of the complainant is a defective one.
4. A person can purchase a mobile handset for its use and cannot purchase a head ache. But in the present case the complainant unable to use the mobile due to defect. It is the bound down duty of the dealer that he should provide a defect free mobile to the complainant, which he has failed to do so. This act of the O.P. amounts to deficiency in service on his part. Further the complainant has not been able to use the mobile due to defect and hence he is entitled to compensation. Therefore under the circumstances refund of price of the mobile will meet the ends of justice. Hence ordered:-
ORDER
The O.P. is directed to refund the price amounting to Rs.6,300/- ( Six thousands and three hundred ) after receipt of the defective mobile handset from the complainant along with Rs. 10,000/- ( ten thousands ) towards compensation and cost to the complainant within one month from the date of receipt of this order failing which the entire amount shall bear an interest at the rate of 9% P.A. till payment.
Accordingly the case is disposed of.
Order pronounced in the open Forum to-day the 3rd day of September 2018.
(S.Rath) (A.K.Purohit)
MEMBER. PRESIDENT
