Order dictated by:
Sh.Anoop Sharma,Presiding Member
1. Rohit Sharma has brought the instant complaint under section 11 & 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 on the allegations that complainant purchased one Phone (Apple) 5S from Madhava Communications, Queens Road, Amritsar vide bill dated 2.1.2016 for an amount of Rs. 30000/-. At the time of purchase of the said phone one Sales Executive of Apps Daily company came to the complainant with offer of insurance by Apps Daily Solutions Pvt.Ltd for one year for Rs. 2499/-. The said Sales Executive informed the complainant that the insurance will cover physical damage, liquid damage, theft, data loss and Viruses. It was also informed by the said Sales Executive that in case of any loss or damage, one back up phone will be provided to the complainant and the phone will be repaired within 10 days of deposit of phone. The complainant purchased the policy from the Sales Executive and the said Executive issued the policy to the complainant. On 20th December 2016, the phone of the complainant got damaged when the complainant met with minor accident while he was driving the Active. The screen of the phone was broken and there was no other material defect. The complainant approached opposite party No.2 and deposited the phone with opposite party No.2 for doing necessary repairs. When the complainant asked opposite party No.2 to provide back up phone, the officials of opposite party No.2 flatly refused to do so. Opposite party No.2 issued job sheet on 21 December 2016 on payment of Rs. 1500/- and assured that the phone will be delivered within 7 days . When the complainant visited opposite party No.2 after 10 days , the officials of opposite party No.2 stated that the phone was not yet ready and the same will be ready within next 7 days and the same assurance was repated on 12.1.2017, 18.1.2017 and finally on 21.1.2017. Vide instant complaint, complainant has sought for the following reliefs:-
(a) Opposite party be directed to pay Rs. 2499/- (cost of premium) + Rs. 1500/- (service charges) + Rs. 30000/- (cost of mobile phone) total Rs. 33,999/- to the complainant.
(b) Compensation to the tune of Rs. 50000/- may also be awarded to the complainant alongwith adequate litigation expenses.
Hence, this complaint.
2. Opposite party No.2 did not put in appearance despite service of notice, as such it was ordered to be proceeded against ex-parte.
3. Opposite party No.1 put appearance through Sh. Harpreet Singh and filed written version taking certain preliminary objections therein inter alia that the present complaint is not maintainable as the complainant has not come to this Forum with clean hands; that the mobile of the complainant was damaged on 13.12.2016 and on 14.12.2016 information regarding damage was provided by the complainant to the customer care number ; that the complainant was advised to visit the Apps Daily Connect Centre i.e. CC1063-Amritsar, M.M.Malviya Road, Backside Airtel Officer, Near Wardrobe Showroom ; that the complainant completed the entire procedure for lodging of the claim and for processing o the claim of pre-approval stage and submitted all required papers to connect centre Executive ; that the Connect Centre Executive sent all claim documents to Mumbai office for further processing and claim approval alongwith damaged handset of customer ; that the delay in repairing of the mobile handset was due to demonetization as there was non availability of required spare parts for repairing the mobile handset . The complainant was informed about this and was asked to wait for next 15 to 20 days and the complainant was agreed for the same ; that the complainant was approached by the Customer Care Executive for giving his consent for alternate option of payment of Rs. 6500/- against current market value of handset which is Rs. 9000/-, but the complainant did not give his consent . On 9.2.2017 the mobile handset was repaired and the same was delivered on 11.2.2017 at registered address of the complainant and the same was received by Ms. Poonam. While denying and controverting other allegations, a prayer for dismissal of complaint was made.
4. In his bid to prove the case complainant tendered into evidence his duly sworn affidavit Ex.C-1, copy of bill Ex.C-2, copy of Apps Daily Cover Ex.C-3, copy of job sheet Ex.C-4 and closed his evidence.
5. Initially opposite party No.1 appeared and filed written version but later on none put appearance on behalf of opposite party No.1, as such it was ordered to be proceeded against ex-parte.
6. We have heard the complainant and have carefully gone through the record on the file.
7. From the facts and circumstances of the case, it becomes evident that the complainant purchased mobile phone (Apple) on 2.1.2016 for Rs. 30000/- and the same was got insured from the opposite party by making payment of the premium to the tune of Rs. 2499/-, copy of cover note is Ex.C-3. At the time of purchase, the Sales Executive of the opposite party informed the complainant that the insurance will cover physical damage, liquid damage, theft, data loss and viruses and it was also informed that in case of any loss or damage, one back up phone will be provided to the complainant. It was the case of the complainant that on 20.12.2016 the phone of the complainant got damaged in an accident and the same was broken. The complainant approached opposite party No.2 and deposited the phone for necessary repairs. Opposite party No.2 issued job sheet on 21.12.2016 and assured the complainant that the set will be repaired within 7 days. The opposite party did not provide the back up phone as assured by the opposite party at the time of Insurance of the said product. After 10 days complainant approached the opposite party No.2 for getting the mobile phone , but the opposite party put off the matter on one pretext or the other and did not provide the mobile even on visits made by the complainant to the opposite party No.2 on 6.1.2017, 12.1.2017, 18.1.2017 and 21.1.2017. As such the opposite parties are deficient in providing service to the complainant . On the other hand the case of the opposite party No.1 is that the delay in providing the phone was due to demonetization as well as non availability of spare parts for repairing the mobile handset and the complainant was duly informed about this and was asked to wait for 15 to 20 days. It was also submitted that the Customer Care Executive approached the complainant for giving his consent for alternate option of payment of Rs. 6500/- against current market value of handset which is Rs.9000/-. But the complainant did not give his consent as he wanted his handset back. As such on 9.2.2017 the handset was repaired and the same was delivered on 11.2.2017 at registered address of the complainant through courier and the same was received by Ms. Poonam. But , however, the opposite party No.1 did not put appearance for adducing any evidence to support his version . As the mobile of the complainant remained in the custody of the opposite party since 21.12.2016 and the complainant has visited the opposite party many a times to get back his mobile . The mobile is the dire need in these days for every person . The opposite party has also not provided the back up phone as assured by the official at the time of getting the Insurance by the complainant. As per version of the opposite party , the mobile was delivered at the registered address of the complainant and the same was received by Ms. Poonam on 11.2.2017 i.e. after a lapse of two months and during the pendency of the present complaint. The complainant has obtained the Insurance for the mobile after spending amount of Rs. 2499/- , even then the complainant has to file the present complaint and faced harassment at the hands of the opposite parties. So the complainant is entitled for compensation as well as litigation expenses.
8. In view of the above discussion, the complaint is partly allowed and the opposite parties are directed to pay compensation to the tune of Rs. 3000/- for the harassment suffered by the complainant while litigation expenses are assessed at Rs. 2000/-. Compliance of this order be made within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order ; failing which, complainant shall be entitled to get the order executed through the indulgence of this Forum. . Copies of the orders be furnished to the parties free of costs. File is ordered to be consigned to the record room.
Announced in Open Forum
Dated : 31.5.2017
