Before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Rohtak.

                                                          Complaint No. : 552.

                                                          Instituted on     : 20.09.2017.

                                                          Decided on       :10.09.2018.

Amar Nath son of Sh. Ram Kumar r/o village Farmana(Badshahpur) Tehsil Meham District Rohtak.

                                                                    ………..Complainant.

                             Vs.

1. Apple India, Regd. Office, 19^th Floor Concorde Tower-C, UB City No.24, Vittal Mallya Road, Bangalore-560001 through its M.D.
2. Anand Communication Care, 127 MCD Market, Gaffar Market, Karol Bagh, New Delhi through its Prop.

……….Opposite parties.

          COMPLAINT U/S 12 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,1986.

BEFORE:  SH.NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT.

                   SH. VED PAL, MEMBER.

Present:       Complainant in person.

                   Sh.Kunal Juneja, Advocate for OP No.1.

                   Opposite party No.2 exparte.

                                      ORDER

NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT:

1.                          Brief facts of the case are that complainant had purchased  a mobile phone IPhone 6 vide bill No.3426 dated 28.05.2017 for Rs.26000/- from the opposite party No.2 who is authorized agent of opposite party No.1 with one year warranty. That the said mobile stopped working and complainant contacted the opposite party No.2. Opposite party No.2 sent the mobile to the service centre and after repair, it was handed over to the complainant but the complainant found that the defect was not removed. That as per the complainant, the opposite parties have supplied a mobile set having manufacturing defect in it. That despite his repeated requests, neither the mobile was properly repaired nor the amount was refunded. That the act of opposite parties is illegal and amounts to deficiency in service. As such, it is prayed that opposite parties may kindly be directed to pay the value of mobile set i.e. Rs.26000/- alongwith interest, compensation and cost of litigation as explained in relief clause.

2.                          After registration of complaint, notice was issued to the opposite parties. Opposite parties No.2 did not appear despite service through registered post and as such was proceeded against exparte vide order dated 07.11.2017 of this Forum. Opposite party No.1 in its reply has submitted that there is no sort of evidence to support the alleged claim of the complainant stating that the device was defective. That opposite party No.1 never denied any sort of service or assistance to him they cannot be held liable to compensate him for his own acts and omission. That there is no deficiency in service on the part of opposite party and dismissal of complaint has been sought. 

3.                          Ld. counsel for the complainant has tendered affidavit Ex.CW1/A, Ex.CW2/A, documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C2 and closed his evidence. On the other hand ld. counsel for the OP No.1 has tendered affidavit Ex.RW1/A, documents Ex.R1 to Ex.R2 and closed his evidence.

4.                          We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through material aspects of the case very carefully.

5.                          As per the copy of transcript of the chat between the complainant and the opposite party/company dated 13.12.2017 placed on record as Ex.C2, the complainant had purchased the product on 28.05.2017 and it was permanently off on 26.06.2017. But despite his repeated requests, the defect could not be removed. It is also observed that the defect appeared within very short period of its purchase i.e. within one month of its warranty period. So the complainant is entitled for the refund of price of his mobile set.

6.                          In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, it is directed that complainant shall hand over the mobile in question alongwith accessories to the opposite parties and in turn opposite party No.1 i.e. manufacturer shall refund the price of mobile set i.e. Rs.26000/-(Rupees twenty six thousand only) alongwith interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of filing the present complaint till its actual realisation and shall also pay a sum of Rs.5000/-(Rupees five thousand only) as compensation and litigation expenses to the complainant within one month from the date of decision.

7.                         Copy of this order be supplied to both the parties free of costs.      File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Announced in open court:

10.09.2018.

                                                          ................................................

                                                          Nagender Singh Kadian, President

                                                          ..........................................

                                                          Ved Pal Hooda, Member.