Complainant present in person
Opponents through Adv. Likhit Gandhi
*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*--*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*--
Per : Mr. V. P. Utpat, President Place : PUNE
// J U D G M E N T //
(25/06/2013)
This complaint is filed by the aggrieved consumer, who has purchased mobile handset from the opponent under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, for deficiency in service. The brief facts are as follows,
1] The complainant is a resident of Wadgaon Budruk, Pune. He is dealing with the technical field; hence he was in need of mobile handset having facility of scientific calculator. Hence, on 9/1/2012 he has purchased Samsung mobile cell model no. GT-5360 from the opponent. While using the handset, he came across infirmity in the said handset, as the scientific calculator was not showing correct values and certain alphabets were missing while scrolling the directory. He has intimated this fact to the authorized service center, which is situated at Deccan Gymkhana, Pune on 20/02/2012. But there was no proper response from the said center. Again he made complaint to the Consumer Satisfaction service of Samsung Company on 5/4/2012 and also informed about the dissatisfaction with the said handset by sending
e-mail on 23/4/2012. In response to the e-mail on 26/4/2012, the representative of the opponent visited to his office and downloaded one scientific calculator via Bluetooth. But the said version was not compatible with the handset. The representative has requested to retain the calculator for a week and treat this as a temporary solution. However, nobody had turned to the complainant for providing permanent solution. The complainant requested from time to time to the opponent and prayed for refund of the price of the handset. Ultimately, he has filed the present complaint for deficiency in service against the opponents. He has claimed an amount of Rs. 99,000/- as a compensation including cost of handset, litigation expenses and mental agony.
2] The opponent appeared before the Forum and filed written version. The fact as regards purchase of handset is admitted by the opponent. But the facts about deficiency in service are denied flatly. It is averred that the Samsung Company is an ISO standard company and it is always selling handset to the customers subject to the terms and conditions of the warranty. It is further contended that the complainant himself downloaded the version of scientific calculator through Android system; hence complainant himself is responsible for deficiency, if any, in using calculator. The opponent has prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
3] After scrutinizing the documentary evidence, which is produced before this Forum, hearing the arguments of both the parties and considering pleadings, the following points arise for my determination. The points, findings and the reasons thereon are as follows-
Sr.No. | POINTS | FINDINGS |
1. | Whether complainant has proved that there is defect in handset as well as deficiency in service on the part of the opponent? | In the affirmative |
2. | What order? | Complaint is partly allowed. |
REASONS :-
4] The admitted facts in the present proceeding are that the complainant has purchased Samsung mobile cell model no. GT-5360 from the opponent on 9/1/2012. When he found defects in the handset as regards scientific calculator and missing alphabets while scrolling the directory, he had informed this fact to the service center of the opponent within warranty period. It reveals from the correspondence between the parties as well as from the written version of the opponent that, one technician had visited to the office of the complainant and made efforts for rectifying the defects, but he could not cure the defects as regards the scientific calculator as well as missing alphabets while scrolling directory. It is alleged by the opponent that the complainant himself has downloaded the version of scientific calculator with Android system; hence he is responsible for deficiency. This statement is self contradictory. It is significant to note that the user manual of Samsung Galaxy GT-5360 is provided by the opponent along with the list and it reveals from the same that the scientific calculator can be used on the said handset and the solution for using the said calculator is given in the said manual. This indicates that the scientific calculator can be used by using said handset. Even after visit of the technician of the opponent, the defects in the handset were not cured. The learned Advocate for the opponent argued before me that the problem of scientific calculator is as regards software, which is not part and parcel of the handset. When the manual provides facility of use of scientific calculator, then it is the duty of the opponent to provide proper service to the customer. In such circumstances, the opponents have no alternative but to refund the price of the mobile handset. It is the case of the complainant that he has purchased the said mobile being a technical person and he was in need of scientific calculator for his daily routine. When the said facility is not available in the handset, then there is no use of that handset for the complainant. It is further significant to note that no serious attention was given by the opponent as regards the second complaint in the said mobile about the missing of alphabets while scrolling the directory. Hence, I held that the complainant has proved that there were defects in the handset as alleged by the complainant. The opponents have not provided satisfactory service to the complainant. Hence, I held that there is deficiency in service on the part of the opponent. In this regard, I held that the complainant is entitled for refund of cost of mobile as shown in the bill i.e. Rs. 6,900/-. He is entitled to get an amount of Rs. 5000/- by way of deficiency in service and mental agony as well as physical suffering. He is further entitled to receive an amount of Rs. 2000/- by way of cost of the litigation. In the result, I answer the points accordingly and pass the following order,
** ORDER **
1. Complaint is partly allowed.
2. It is declared that the opponents have
caused deficiency in service by selling
defective handset to the complainant.
3. The Opponents are directed to pay total
amount of Rs. 13,900/- (Rs. Thirteen
Thousand Nine Hundred only) to the
complainant after returning the handset
by the complainant.
4. Copies of this order be furnished to
the parties free of cost.
