DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BATHINDA

CC.No.467 of 28-10-2013

Decided on 06-02-2014

Rakshit Garg S/o Ravinder Kumar S/o Mangat Rai R/o Ajit Mill Road, St.No.4, Rampura Phul, Tehsil Phul and District Bathinda.

........Complainant

Versus

1.Bajaj Electronic & Watch Service, Main Bazaar, Rampura Phul 151103, through its Proprietor/Partner.

2.Shri Ram Tele Services (Samsung Service Centre), SCF-62, Ist Floor, Near Hotel Amsun Pride, Amrik Singh Road, Bathinda, through its Incharge/Proprietor/Partner.

3.Samsung India Electronics Pvt. Ltd., B-1, Sector-81, Phase-2, Nodia District, Gautam Buddh Nagar, Uttar Pardesh.

.......Opposite parties

Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

QUORUM

Smt.Vikramjit Kaur Soni, President.

Smt.Sukhwinder Kaur, Member.

Sh.Jarnail Singh, Member.

Present:-

For the Complainant: Sh.S.S Maur, counsel for the complainants.

For Opposite parties: Sh.Kuljit Pal Sharma, counsel for the opposite party Nos.2

and 3.

Opposite party No.1 ex-parte.

ORDER

VIKRAMJIT KAUR SONI, PRESIDENT:-

1. This complaint has been filed by the complainant under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 as amended upto date (Here-in-after referred to as an 'Act'). The brief facts of the complaint are that on the allurement of the opposite parties the complainant has purchased one mobile handset make Samsung, model No.8262, Samsung Galaxy Core, having IMEI No.357089054230729 for Rs.13,250/- vide invoice No.5388/- dated 28.9.2013 from the opposite party No.1, manufactured by the opposite party No.3 with one year warranty. At the time of selling of the abovesaid mobile handset the opposite party No.1 assured the complainant that it is of the best quality and there would be no complaint regarding its functioning and the Idea company would provide 500 MB data free per month for 2 months and Vodafone company would provide 1GB data free per month for 2 months to him and also assured him to provide the best services in case of any defect in it. After the purchase of the abovesaid mobile handset, it started creating problems from the very first day of its purchase as it 'hang' automatically and 'on' and 'off' during the talk and internet and its function is not working properly. The complainant approached the opposite party No.1, it asked him to approach the opposite party No.2, the service centre of the opposite party No.3. The complainant approached the opposite party No.2 on dated 23.10.2013 and told it about the problem of hang, the opposite party No.2 did not provide him any job sheet and conveyed him that there is manufacturing defect in the mobile handset in question that should be replaced with new one. On the next day the complainant told the opposite party No.1 that it has given him a defective mobile handset but it did not listen to him. Hence the present complaint filed by the complainant to seek the directions of this Forum to the opposite parties either to replace the defective mobile handset with new one or in alternative to refund him its price i.e. Rs.13,250/- alongwith cost and compensation.

2. Registered notice has been sent to the opposite party No.1 on dated 22.11.2013 vide postal receipt No.A RP319432111IN but despite receiving the summons, none appeared on behalf of the opposite party No.1 before this Forum, hence ex-parte proceedings are taken against it.

3. The opposite party No.2 and 3 after appearing before this Forum have filed their joint written statement and pleaded that under the warranty their obligation is to set right the abovesaid mobile handset by repairing or replacing the defective parts only. The performance of the abovesaid mobile handset depends upon the handling of the product and downloading of the various mobile applications and virus threat from the internet usage. No assurance of the replacement of the abovesaid mobile handset was given by the opposite party Nos.2 and 3 under the terms of the warranty and the complainant cannot claim more than he has agreed to. The complainant has neither alleged any specific irreparable manufacturing defect or inferior quality of the specific part of the product nor filed any documentary evidence i.e. authenticated report of expert and qualified person of central Approved Laboratories in support of his allegations. The opposite party Nos.2 and 3 further pleaded that the Idea company will provide 500 MB data free per month for 2 months and Vodafone company will provide 1GB data free per month for 2 months, if the customer buys new connection from either of the company and it has nothing to do with the mobile handset. The opposite party Nos.2 and 3 further pleaded that it is clear that there is no such defect in the mobile handset in question that cannot be repaired or removed, thus the complainant is not entitled for its replacement or the refund of its price.

4. The parties have led their evidence in support of their respective pleadings.

5. Arguments heard. The record alongwith written submissions submitted by the parties perused.

6. The submission of the learned counsel of the complainant is that soon after the purchase of the abovesaid mobile handset, it started creating problem relating to hang automatically on/off during talk and internet was not functioning properly. At the time of selling of the abovesaid mobile handset the opposite party No.1 assured the complainant that it is of the best quality and there would be no complaint regarding its functioning and also assured that the Idea company would provide 500 MB data free per month for 2 months and Vodafone company would provide 1GB data free per month for 2 months and also gave one year warranty on it. The complainant approached the opposite party No.1 with the above mentioned problems, it asked him to approach the opposite party No.2, the service centre of the opposite party No.3, but the opposite party No.2 without providing him any job sheet conveyed him that there is manufacturing defect in the abovesaid mobile handset, but failed to replace the same with new one or refund its price.

7. On the other hand the submission of the opposite party Nos.2 and 3 is that the complainant never approached them with any complaint. Moreover the complainant has neither alleged any specific irreparable manufacturing defect or inferior quality of any specific part of the product nor filed any documentary evidence in this regard. Under the warranty the obligation of the opposite party Nos.2 and 3 is to set right the abovesaid mobile handset by repairing or replacing the defective parts only. However, as a goodwill gesture, the opposite party Nos.2 and 3 are ready to repair the mobile handset in question, if there is any defect in it.

8. The learned counsel of the opposite party Nos.2 and 3 have suffered the statement before this Forum on dated 14.1.2014 to the effect that 'As per the instructions of the opposite party Nos.2 and 3, they are ready to repair the mobile handset in question free of cost and also ready to provide 500 MB data free per month for 2 months of idea company to the complainant after receiving the mobile handset in question from him within 25 days from the date of receipt of the copy of this order'. The said statement shows that the opposite party Nos.2 and 3 are ready to rectify the defect in the abovesaid mobile handset, if there is any defect in it, but the complainant did not agree to this offer given by the opposite party Nos.2 and 3, thus continued with the present complaint.

9. A perusal of record placed on file shows that no job sheet has been placed on file by the complainant to prove that there is any defect in the mobile handset in question. In the absence of any documentary evidence that the abovesaid mobile handset is having inherent manufacturing defect in it, no order of its replacement or refund can be given. However, from the statement of the learned counsel of the opposite party Nos.2 and 3 dated 14.1.2014 it is clear that as promised by the opposite party Nos.2 and 3 they have failed to provide 500 MB data free per month for 2 months of the Idea company and 1GB data free per month for 2 months of Vodafone company.

10. Therefore in view of what has been discussed above there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party Nos.2 and 3. Hence this complaint is accepted with Rs.3000/- as cost and compensation against the opposite party Nos.2 and 3 and dismissed qua the opposite party No.1. The opposite party Nos.2 and 3 are directed to rectify the problem in the mobile handset in question and provide 500 MB data free per month for 2 months of the Idea company and 1GB data free per month for 2 months of the Vodafone company. The opposite party Nos.2 and 3 are further directed to give fresh warranty of 6 months on the abovesaid mobile handset to the complainant.

11. The compliance of this order be done within 30 days from the date of receipt of the copy of this order.

12. A copy of this order be sent to the parties concerned free of cost and file be consigned to the record room.

Pronounced in open Forum:-

06-02-2014

(Vikramjit Kaur Soni)

President

(Sukhwinder Kaur)

Member

(Jarnail Singh)

Member