Chandigarh

DF-II

CC/571/2016

Narinder Dogra - Complainant(s)

Versus

Apple India Pvt. Ltd., - Opp.Party(s)

Varun Sharma Adv.

02 May 2017

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II, U.T. CHANDIGARH

======

Consumer Complaint  No	:	571 of 2016
Date  of  Institution	:	09.08.2016
Date   of   Decision	:	02.05.2017

 

 

 

 

Narinder Dogra s/o Sh.Puran Chand, resident of #2780, Sector 56, Chandigarh.        

             …..Complainant

Versus

1]  Apple India Pvt. Ltd., 19^th Floor, Concorde Tower C, UB City, NO.24, Vittal Mallya Road, Banglore.

2]  F1 Info Solutions and Services Pvt. Ltd., First Floor, SCO No.274, Sector 32-D, Chandigarh.

3]  Flipkart, WS Retail Pvt. Ltd., Ozone Manay Tech Park, No.56/18, B Block, Garvebhavipalya, Hosur Road, Bangalore.

4]  WS Retail Services Pvt. Ltd., 42/1 & 43, Kacherakanahalli Villge, Jadigenahalli Hobli, Hoskhote Taluk, Banglore.  

                               ….. Opposite Parties

 

BEFORE:  SH.RAJAN DEWAN                 PRESIDENT

         MRS.PRITI MALHOTRA             MEMBER

                                SH.RAVINDER SINGH              MEMBER 

 

Argued by: Sh.Varun Sharma, Counsel for complainant.

            OP No.1 exparte.

Sh.Devinder Kumar, Counsel for OP No.2.

Sh.Rohit Kumar, Counsel for OPs No.3 & 4.

 

 

PER PRITI MALHOTRA, MEMBER

 

 

          Briefly stated, the complainant had purchased one Mobile Apple iPhone 5S, grey colour, for Rs.21,999/- from Opposite Party No.4 through Opposite Party NO.3 on 15.2.2016 (Ann.C-1), carrying one year warranty.  It is averred that all of a sudden on 8.7.2016 the later part of the screen of the mobile in question got blurred  and it was informed to Apple India Support (Ann.C-2) and thereafter, the complainant also approached Opposite Party NO.2.  It is also averred that when the complainant again approached Opposite Party NO.2 for collecting the handset on the same day, he was told that the mobile is not covered under warranty as the damage is done due to pressure on phone, whereas there is no sign of scratch or damage on the phone.  It is submitted that the complainant asked the dealing person to give him complaint book to which he flatly refused and forced the complainant to sign the job sheet without writing any comment on it (Ann.C-3). It is also submitted that the act & conduct of OPs of not repairing the mobile handset in question even within the warranty period amount to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice causing harassment to the complainant.  A legal notice was also sent to the OPs, but to no avail.  Hence, this complaint.

 

2]       The Opposite Party No.1 did not turn up despite service of notice sent through regd. post on 17.8.2016, hence it was proceeded exparte vide order dated 19.9.2016.

         The Opposite Party NO.2 has filed reply stating that the answering Opposite Party is just the authorised service centre of Apple India Private Limited and the warranty of the product is given by the said company i.e. the manufacturer of the mobile handset and not by the answering Opposite Party.  It is stated that answering Opposite Party repairs the product of the said company on its instructions and it is just a facilitator between the company and the customer, as such the Opposite Party No.2 is under no liability, raised by the complainant.  It is submitted that during observation, the answering Opposite Party found that due to pressure, the handset was damaged and complainant admitted the same and accordingly signed the job sheet.  It is also submitted that the said damage was due to manhandling which are not covered under warranty terms of the manufacturer and the complainant was told that the repair would be on chargeable basis, which was refused. Pleading no deficiency in service and denying rest of the allegations, the Opposite Party NO.2 has prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

        

         The Opposite Parties NO.3 & 4 have filed joint reply stating therein that the complainant has wrongly mentioned the name Flipkart W.S Retail Service Pvt. Ltd. and the same is W.S.Retail Services Pvt. Ltd. It is stated that answering OPs are registered seller on website www.flipkart.com through which it sells products of other manufacturers, trades etc. It is also stated that the Opposite Party No.1 is the manufacturer of the mobile in question and answering OPs have nothing to do with the warranty and after sale service of the product and therefore, the answering Opposite Parties cannot be held liable for the defect in the product, as alleged. It is submitted that the complainant had got nothing to do with the answering Opposite Parties since it is neither the manufacturer nor the Service Centre.  It is also submitted that to provide after sale service and warranty is the responsibility on the part of the manufacturer and the complainant has wrongly implicated the answering Opposite Parties as a party to the complaint. That the dispute is between the complainant, manufacturer and the service centre and therefore Opposite Parties have got nothing to do with this.  Rest of the allegations have been denied with a prayer to dismiss the complaint.

 

3]       Rejoinder has also been filed by the complainant thereby reiterating the assertions as made in the complaint and controverting that of the reply filed by OPs.

 

4]       Parties led evidence in support of their contentions.

 

5]       We have heard the ld.Counsel for the parties and have also perused the entire record.

 

6]       Perusal of the record reveals that the OPs failed to redress the grievance of the complainant qua the defect in his handset purchased from them. 

 

7]       It is admitted that the mobile handset in question was deposited with Opposite Party No.2/Service Centre on 8.7.2016 for the rectification of the defect raised i.e. screen got blurred and despite agitating the matter and sending e-mail as well as legal notice requesting for repairing the mobile handset, was not entertained by OPs NO.1 & 2.

 

8]       The OPs NO.1 & 2 in reply have contended that since the handset in question was found to be damaged due to pressure as per the observations of ACS Team, as is also recorded in Job Card/Service Delivery Challan, dated 8.7.2016 (Ann.C-3).  It is pleaded that the defects of such type i.e. damaged due to pressure, are out of the warranty as it fall under mishandling by the user and said it to be a manhandling case. 

 

9]      The contentions of the Opposite Parties No.1 & 2 raised in their reply are not justified in true sense and we are of the considered opinion that the complainant has all rights to avail the benefits given under the warranty policy of the manufacturer, which agrees to redress the grievance of the complainant, as and when encountered with the mobile handset in question within the warranty period.   As such, the OPs NO.1 & 2 failed to provide proper service and their deficiency in service is clear.   It also transpires from the reply of OPs No.1 & 2 that the handset in question is repairable, so we deem it proper to direct the OPs NO.1 & 2 to repair the handset in question.

 

10]      In view of the above discussion, we allow the present complaint against OPs No.1 & 2 with direction to return the mobile handset in question to the complainant after making it properly functional by carrying out necessary repair or replacement of parts, if any, without any charges.  In case, the OPs NO.1 & 2 failed to rectify the defect in the handset in question, then they shall be liable to refund the invoice price of the handset i.e. Rs.21,999/- along with Rs.5000/- as costs.

         This order shall be complied with by OPs NO.1 & 2 within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order.

 

11]      However, the complaint qua OPs NO.3 & 4 stands dismissed.

        Certified copy of this order be communicated to the parties, free of charge. After compliance file be consigned to record room.

Announced

2^nd May, 2017               

 

                                                                                      Sd/-

                                                                   (RAJAN DEWAN)

PRESIDENT

 

 

Sd/-

 (PRITI MALHOTRA)

MEMBER

 

Sd/-

(RAVINDER SINGH)

MEMBER