Punjab

Sangrur

CC/461/2017

Jatinder Pal - Complainant(s)

Versus

Amazon Seller Services Pvt. Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Sh.Tomesh Sharma

01 Mar 2018

ORDER

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SANGRUR

                             

                                                                  Complaint no.  461                                                                                       

                                                                Instituted on:    13.09.2017                                                                                

                                                              Decided on:     01.03.2018

 

Jatinder Pal H. No.739, Street No.1A, Block-D, Guru Nanak Colony, Behind Pal Children Hospital, Sangrur.        

                                                …. Complainant

                                Versus

 

1.     Amazon Seller Services Private Limited, Ground Floor, Eros Corporate Centre, Nehru Palace, New Delhi through its M.D.

 

2.   Green Mobiles, Anjaneya Infrastructure Project No.38 and 39, Soukya Road, Kancherakanahallli, Hoskote Taluka, Banaglore Rural District Banglore     ( Karnataka) through its Managing Director.

                                              ….Opposite parties.

 

 

FOR THE COMPLAINANT      :     Shri Tomesh Sharma, Advocate                           

 

FOR OPP. PARTY No.1                     :      Shri Amit Goyal,  Advocate

 

FOR OPP. PARTYS  NO.2         :    Exparte                         

 

 

Quorum

         

                    Sukhpal Singh Gill, President

Sarita Garg, Member

     

 

 

 

 

 

ORDER:  

 

Sukhpal Singh Gill, President

 

1.             Jatinder Pal,  complainant has preferred the present complaint against the opposite parties (referred to as OPs in short) on the ground that he purchased one Honour 8 Pro( Black, 6GB RAM + 128GB Memory) from OP no.2 through OP no.1 on online under invoice number BLR5-43197 dated 13.07.2017 and paid an amount of Rs.29,999/- . The OPs gave one year guarantee/ warranty. The said mobile phone started giving problem i.e.  when  the complainant tried to call someone  then it rings once and automatically discontinued , charging problem, SIMs are not working properly, heating problem and signal problem. The complainant lodged the complaint with OPs and requested to refund the amount which was not accepted by the OPs . Thereafter through their emails the OPs admitted that  there is manufacturing defect in the mobile set but the OPs failed to refund the purchase price. Thus, alleging deficiency in service on the part of OPs, the complainant has sought following reliefs:-

i)      OPs be directed to refund the purchase price of the mobile set i.e. Rs.29999/- alongwith interest @18% per annum from the date of purchase till realization,

ii)     OPs be directed to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs.50000/- as compensation   on account of mental agony, harassment,

iii)   OPs be directed to pay Rs.5500/- as litigation expenses.

2.             Notices were issued to the OPs but despite service OP no.2 did not appear and as such OP no.2  was proceeded exparte.

3.             In reply filed by OP No.1, it is submitted that the complainant had approached the CS of the OP on 17.07.2017 and 19.07.2017 requesting a refund on the order since the front camera quality was not upto his expectation. The specialist from the mobile team of OP found no actual defect with the actual product and informed the customer about replacement since the OP has a replacement only policy for mobiles.  It is further submitted that CS of the OP by mail dated 19.07.2017  informed the complainant that as per the Return policy, the product is liable for replacement only. Thus, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the OP no.1.

4.             The complainant in his evidence has tendered documents Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-8 and closed evidence. On the other hand, OP No.1 has tendered document Ex.OP1/1 and closed evidence.    

5.             We have carefully perused the complaint, version of the OPs and evidence produced on the file and also heard the arguments of learned counsel for the parties. In our opinion the complaint has following merits.

6.             The complainant has stated in his complaint that he purchased one Honour 8 Pro (Black, 6GB RAM + 128GB Memory) from OP no.2 through OP no.1 on online under invoice number BLR5-43197 dated 13.07.2017 under one year guarantee and warranty  and paid an amount of Rs.29,999/-  which is evident from invoice dated 13.07.2017 Ex.C-4.  The complainant's further case is that the said mobile phone started giving problems i.e.  when the complainant tried to call someone  then it rings once and automatically discontinued , charging problem, SIMs are not working properly, heating problem and signal problem. The complainant lodged the complainant with OPs and requested to refund the amount which was not accepted by the OPs.  On the other hand, the OP no.1 has admitted in his reply that complainant had approached the CS of the OP on 17.07.2017 and 19.07.2017 requesting a refund on the order since the front camera quality was not upto his expectation and CS  of the OP by a mail dated 19.07.2017 informed the complainant that as per the return policy , the product  is liable for replacement only.

7.             From the perusal of the entire file we find that the complainant has not produced any policy/ instructions of the OP  no.1 upon which the OP no.1 is liable to refund the price amount of the mobile set in question. Moreover, the  complainant has not produced any other document which proves that the OP is liable to refund the price amount of the mobile set in question. The OP no.1 itself  admits that their CS through a mail dated 19.02017 informed the complainant that as per return policy of the OPs, the OP  no.1 is liable to replace the mobile set in question. Accordingly, we find no reason/ occasion to order the OPs to refund the price amount of the mobile set in question to complainant.    

8.             In view of the matter discussed above, we direct the OPs to replace the mobile set in question of the complainant with new one of the same model, as per their policy. The OPs are further directed to  pay  a consolidated amount of  compensation of Rs.5000/-on account of mental pain, agony and harassment and litigation expenses.

9.             This order of ours shall be complied with  within 30 days from the receipt of copy of the order.  Copy of the order be supplied to the parties free of charge. File be consigned to records in due course.                   Announced

                March 1, 2018

 

 

 

                 (Sarita Garg)   (Sukhpal Singh Gill)                                                                                                                                                                      

 Member                                       President