Nisha Nath Ojha
- In the instant case the Complainant has sought for following reliefs against the Opposite party:-
- To direct the opposite parties to refund the full price of handset along with 18% interest.
- To direct the opposite parties to pay Rs. 25,000/- ( Rs. Twenty Five Thousand only ) as compensation.
- To direct the opposite parties to pay Rs. 5,000/- ( Rs. Five Thousand only ) as Litigation costs.
- The facts of this case lies in a narrow compass which is as follows:-
The complainant has asserted that he has purchased a Beetel Handset from opposite party no. 1 on 04.03.2012 for his personal use bearing model no. GD 404 and IMEI1 no. 911139900116520 and IMEI2 no. 911139900269576 respectively after paying the price of Rs. 2,499/- as will appear from annexure – 1.
The complainant has further asserted that in the service book/owner manual it is specifically mentioned that there is warranty of twelve months on the handset from the date of purchase. The handset was operated and used as per the instruction mentioned in the owner manual.
The complainant has further asserted that in the month of August 2012 the complainant found that the handset is not properly functioning. He immediately lodged the complaint with the opposite party no. 1 and requested to rectify the defect developed in the handset during the warranty period. The complainant was directed to approach opposite party no. 2. The complainant in pursuance of such direction approached opposite party no. 2 and defect was brought to the notice of opposite party no. 2 where Engineer/Technician after examinining the handset issued the service job card as will appear from annexure – 2.
The complainant approached the opposite party no. 2 and requested him to deliver the handset after rectifying the defect developed in it but opposite party no. 2 failed to deliver the handset on one pretext or other. Then the complainant sent Email to customer care and requested to redress the grievance of the complainant but all went in vain as will appear from annexure – 3.
The grievance of the complainant is that uptill now no action has been taken by the opposite parties to redress the grievance of the complainant.
From record it appears that when the registered notice sent to opposite parties did not returned unserved then vide order dated 07.09.2015 the tamila was declared valid and several adjournments were given to opposite parties to file written statement. When the opposite parties neither appeared nor filed written statement then this case was heard ex – parte.
It goes without saying that as the complainant has stated aforementioned facts in the complaint on the solemn affirmation and there is no counter version of the opposite parties, hence we have no option but accept the facts asserted by complainant which clearly disclose deficiency on the part of opposite parties.
For the discussion made above we direct the opposite party no. 1 to return the price of handset i.e. Rs. 2,499/- ( Rs. Two Thousand Four Ninety Nine only ) which opposite party no. 1 has received vide annexure – 1 within the period of two months from the date of receipt of this order or certified copy of this order failing which opposite parties will pay 10% interest on the amount of Rs. 2,499/- ( Rs. Two Thousand Four Ninety Nine only ) till its final payment is made.
Both opposite parties are further directed to pay Rs. 1,000/- ( Rs. One Thousand only ) to the complainant by way of compensation and litigation costs within the period of two months.
Accordingly this complaint stands allowed to the extent referred above.
Member President
