MR LAXMI NARAYAN PADHI, PRESIDENT… The factual matrix of the complaint is that, the complainant had purchased a Mobile set Make Videocon X 30 Pro on dated 22/11/2014 from OP.No.1 by paying an amount of Rs.3750/-. After purchase, in using within one month and in valid warranty period the said mobile hand set shows some problems like display & Keypad do not function. So, the complainant approached the OP No.1 and handover the set along with retail invoice for rectification to which the OP.1 said that he will sent the set to the service center i.e. situated at Jeypore, dist of Koraput, but it will take two weeks time to redeem the set. After two weeks as per assurance, the complainant approached the OP.1, but the OP.1 neither gave the mobile nor issued any service job sheet and abused the complainant with warning to not to come to his shop again and he also expressed that, he never cared to any court or forum. Hence the complainant became conform that the said set has some inherent defect which could not be repaired by the OP.s, and the complainant harassed which cannot be evaluated in terms of money. The OP.No.1 & 2 are neglecting to render their services, which amounts to deficiency in service under Consumer Protection Act.1986. Due to such illegal action of the OP.s, the complainant inflicted great humility, mental discomfort and financial losses. Inter alia the complainant craves the leave of this forum and prayed before the Forum to direct the OP.s to pay the price of the said handset as mentioned above along with a cost of Rs.50,000/- as compensation and Rs.3,000/- towards cost of the litigation for such irregularities on the part of the OP.s.
2. On the other hand, the OP.s failed to file any counter to the claims in spite of chances given for three months of its admission. Hence the OP.s set ex parte as provisions enumerated in Sec.13(2)(b) of the C.P.Act.1986. The complainant heard the case at length and perused the records.
3. From the above submissions, it is found that the complainant has procured the mobile set on dt.22.11.2014 and the same became defect with in valid warranty period. As per the specifications of service warranty conditions, the complainant approached the OP.no.1 for necessary repair showing the above said troubles, but the OP.1 neither redeemed the set through their service center nor replaced the set with a new one, rather he kept the mobile along with retail invoice in his own custody and without issuing any job sheet or paper abused the complainant and warned to not to come again. Hence the complainant going through mental injury inflicted financial losses and valuable times, under compelling circumstances file the instant case.
4. From the above facts and on perusal of submissions filed by the complainant, we are of the view that the alleged set has some manufacture defect and the OP.1 despite receiving notice from this forum failed to settle the present dispute of complainant and there is nothing to disbelieve with the contentions of complainant without filing of counter and evidences by the OP.s, hence we feel that the action of OP.1 is illegal, arbitrary, highhanded, unscrupulous and unfair which amounts to deficiency in service, hence the complainant is entitled for relief.
The complaint is allowed against the OP.no.2 with costs.
O R D E R
i. The opposite party no.2 supra is hereby directed to pay the price of the set i.e. Rs.3,750/- (Three thousand Seven hundred & fifty) inter alia to pay Rs.3,000/-(Three thousand) as compensation and a sum of Rs.2000/-(Two thousand) towards the cost of litigation to the complainant.
ii. All the above directions shall be complied with in 30 days of this order, failing which, the total sum will bear 12% interest per annum till its realization.
Pronounced in the open forum on this the 26th day of Sept'2015.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT, DCDRF,
NABARANGPUR.
Date of Preparation:
Date of dispatch :
Date of received by
the A/A for Ops / Complainant :
Initial of the dispatcher.
