BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES

REDRESSAL FORUM, JALANDHAR.

Complaint No.264 of 2016

Date of Instt. 16.06.2016

Date of Decision: 24.01.2018

Manjinder Pal son of Sh. Bishan Dass, resident of B-I/846, Ram Nagar, Jalandhar.

..........Complainant Versus

1. Biscoot Secure, Pee Pee Marketing (OM), Wazir Enclave, Opposite Bansal Palace, Jalandahr through Office Incharge.

2. Dinesh Aneja, Proprietor Aneja Telecom, Ram Nagar, Near Arya Samaj Mandir, Gandhi Nagar, Jalandhar.

..….…Opposite Parties

Complaint Under the Consumer Protection Act.

Before: Sh. Karnail Singh (President)

Smt. Harvimal Dogra (Member)

Present: Sh. TK Badhan, Adv Counsel for the Complainant.

OP No.1 and 2 exparte.

Order

Harvimal Dogra (Member)

1. The present complaint has been filed by the complainant namely Manjinder Pal, under 'The Consumer Protection Act', 1986 against Biscoot Secure and Others/OPs, on the allegations of physical and mental harassment and further prayed to direct the OPs to issue the claim of the mobile handset, which is insured by the OP No.1 and further issued to make a compensation, to the tune of Rs.10,000/- and also cost of litigation of Rs.9000/-.

2. The case of the complainant, in brief is that the complainant is a resident of B-I/846, Ram Nagar, Jalandhar. The complainant purchased a Mobile Lenovo Handset K-3, bearing IMEI No.869071023096218 through online shopping from the site of Flipkart.com. The complainant has got the insurance policy from OP No.1 on the instance of OP No.2, who is mobile dealer. The complainant has paid the policy amount to the OP No.1 while getting it and the OP No.1 has issued a policy, vide its Sr. No.406 in the name of the complainant. The said insurance policy contains the security of mobile handset and it is mentioned over the leaf of the policy regarding the condition of policy. The complainant is falling under the ambit of the conditions mentioned by OP No.1 over the policy issued by the OP No.1. That the complainant approached the authorized service centre of Lenovo Mobile Company. The service centre of the mobile company has prepared an estimate for repair of handset. The complainant visited the OP No.1 for getting the claim of the insured mobile, but the OP No.1 refused to make the claim of the mobile handset. The complainant also approached the OP No.2 for getting repair the mobile handset from the OP No.1 and for getting claim from OP No.1, but he flatly refused to admit the claim of the complainant, that the complainant suffered mental and physical harassment due to which the complainant filed this complaint before this Hon'ble Court of justice.

3. After the formal admission of the complaint, notice was issued to the OPs, but despite service both the OPs failed to appear and ultimately, OP No.1 and 2 were proceeded against exparte.

4. In order to prove his exparte claim, the complainant himself tendered into evidence his own affidavit Ex.CA alongwith some documents Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-3 and then closed the evidence.

5. We have heard the learned counsel for the complainant and also gone through the case file very minutely.

6. In the present case, it is established on the file that the complainant had purchased a mobile handset Lenovo K-3 bearing IMEI No. 869071023096218 through online shopping from the site of Flipkart.com. In order to prove his case, the complainant has produced on the file Invoice of the mobile i.e. Ex.C-1. He has also produced on the file mobile protection plan (Insurance Policy) i.e. Ex.C-2. The mobile got damaged and the complainant approached the authorized service centre of Lenovo Mobile Company, who prepared the estimate of Rs.4441/-, for the repair of the mobile handset, the estimate of the repair is Ex.C-3. The complainant visited OP No.1 for getting the claim, but the OP No.1 refused to make the claim of the mobile, causing mental and physical harassment to the complainant. Moreover, the OPs failed to come forward and the evidence led by the complainant has remained un-rebutted and un-challenged. So, the complainant has been able to establish the allegations as made in the complaint.

7. In the light of above detailed discussion, the complaint of the complainant succeeds and the same is hereby partly accepted with cost in favour of the complainant and against the OPs and the OPs are directed to issue the claim of Rs.4441/-, which is insured by the OP No.1 and to pay Rs.2000/- as compensation for harassment, which the complainant suffered at the hands of the OPs and pay Rs.1000/- as cost of litigation. The entire compliance be made within one month from the date of receipt of the copy of order. This complaint could not be decided within stipulated time frame due to rush of work.

8. Copies of the order be supplied to the parties free of cost, as per Rules. File be indexed and consigned to the record room.

Dated Harvimal Dogra Karnail Singh

24.01.2018 Member President