Delhi

East Delhi

CC/331/2015

CHARU GUPTA - Complainant(s)

Versus

APPLE MOBILE - Opp.Party(s)

10 Jan 2017

ORDER

                 DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM, EAST, Govt of NCT Delhi

                  CONVENIENT SHOPPING CENTRE, 1^st FLOOR, SAINI ENCLAVE, DELHI 110092                                  

                                                                                                  Consumer complaint no.          331 /2015

                                                                                                  Date of Institution                  22/05/2015

                                                                                                  Order Reserved on                 22/05/2016

                                                                                                  Date of Order                          10/01/2017  

                                                                                                        

In matter of

Ms  Charu Gupta, adult   

D/o Hem Kumar

R/o F-5, F Block, Unchepar

Mandawali Delhi 110092……………………….……..…………………..….Complainant

                                                                  

                                                                     Vs

1-M/s New Mobile Mart  

R-52, Nr Metro Pillar 44,

Vikas Marg, Shakarpur Delhi  110092

 

2- M/s New Mobile Care India Pvt Ltd.        

WZ 109, Street no. 01,

Sadh Nagar, Palam Colony, New Delhi 110045

 

3- Apple India Pvt Lt

19^th Floor, Concord Tower,

U B City, NH 24, Vinod Mallya Road

Bangalore , Pin 560001 ……………………………………………..………….……Opponents

 

Complainant Advocate……………………….……….Rajesh Kumar Sharma 

Opponent 1,2 &3 ………………………………………..Ex Parte

 

Quorum                                                                  Sh Sukhdev Singh      President

                                                                                 Dr P N Tiwari              Member                                                                                                   

                                                                                 Mrs Harpreet Kaur    Member

 

Order by Dr P N Tiwari, Member 

Brief Facts of the case                                   

Complainant purchased Apple mobile, model no. 5C 8GB with IMEI 358549051832826 from New Mobile Mart as OP1 for a sum of Rs 29,500/- on dated 03/08/2014 vide invoice no. 7409 marked here as CW1/1. The mobile had two years insurance for cashless protection plan from Mobile Care OP2 after paying a sum of Rs 2950/- vide invoice no. 2657 with plan ID no. NMC 73067. It had protection against for accidental damages for two years, extended service warranty and mobile theft from the date of purchase ie 03/08/2014 as marked as CW1/2.

The said mobile created problem of not reading SIM card.  Mobile was taken to service centre OP2 and job sheet vide no. 73067 was prepared and was assured to return the mobile in 7 days.  The complainant went to OP2 when no response was received in seven days, but did not get any satisfactory reply. Even after visiting personally number of times, she did not get her phone after repair. So felt deficiency in service on the part of OP2 and filed this complaint and claimed refund of cost of mobile Rs 29,500/-with Rs 50,000/- compensation for mental harassment and 15,000/- as litigation charges. 

Notices were served. None put their appearance despite of serving notices. After submission of postal department tracking report, OPs were proceeded Ex Parte.  Complainant submitted Ex Parte evidence on affidavit which were on record. She affirmed her facts on affidavit as stated in her complainant. As evidences were not controverted, so presumed to be true and correct. By this, complainant had proved her allegations of deficiency in services by OP2.

Arguments were heard and order was reserved.

We have gone through all the facts and evidence of case. It was admitted that the said mobile was given to OP2 for rectifying the defects, but the same was not returned by OP2 where the mobile was under warranty. As OP2 did not return the mobile after repairing, establishes deficiency in service by OP2 and mobile was with OP2. This clearly establishes deficiency in service of OP2. In addition to this, OP3 had given cashless protection plan covering accidental damages, extended warranty, water damage and mobile theft for two years warranty through OP2. OP1 was a seller of the mobile and as such no allegation of deficiency was seen on their part. 

Thus, we come to the conclusion that complainant has proved deficiency in services of OP2. So we allow this complaint and pass the following order -

Order-                                                                           

1. OP2 is directed to get the said mobile repaired within 15 days from receiving of this order and hand over mobile in good working condition to complainant.

 

1. OP2 will also give two year extended warranty on the same terms and conditions.
2. If OP2 fails to comply the order in stipulated time, then OP2 will pay the cost of the mobile with 9% interest from the date of filing of this complaint till realized.
3. We also award compensation of Rs 5,000/- for mental agony and physical harassment with Rs 3000/- as litigation charges.
4. If awarded amount is not realized in time, then same interest shall be applicable on entire award till realized.   

The copy of this order be sent to the parties as per rules and file be consigned to the Record Room.

 

(Dr) P N Tiwari Member                                                                             Mrs Harpreet Kaur Member                                                                         

 

                                                 Shri Sukhdev Singh  President