Orissa

Cuttak

CC/94/2019

Anjana Samal - Complainant(s)

Versus

BM,Channel-4,Xiamomi Technology India Pvt Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

B K Sinha

01 Dec 2022

ORDER

IN THE COURT OF THE DIST. CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,CUTTACK.

                                     C.C.No.94/2019

 

Anjana Samal,W/O:Jagannath Das,

Resident of At:SikharpurUparsahi,

Near Sai temple Plot No.860,

Dist:Cuttack-753003.                                                          ... Complainant.

 

                                                                Vrs.

1.                   B.M.Channel-4,

XIAOMI TECHNOLOGY INDIA PVT. LTD.

DOLAMUNDAI,CUTTACK,ODISHA,PIN-753001.

 

2.                 XIAOMI TECHNOLOGY INDIA PVT. LTD.

SY No.94/3,Koraluru,Village,Kasaba Hoble,Haskote Talik,

Bangalore,Kkarnatak-560067.

 

3.                  Flipkart Head Office 56/18 AND 55/09,

7^thFloor,OzoneManay Tech Park,

Hosur Road,Garvebhavipalya,

Bangalore,Karnatak-560068.

 

4.                  Branch Manager,

Flipkart Logistic Pvt. Ltd.,

Behind NishamaniHall,Link Road,

Madhupatna,Cuttack-753010.... Opp. Parties.

 

 

Present:               Sri Debasish Nayak,President.

                            Sri SibanandaMohanty,Member.

 

Date of filing:     14.08.2019

Date of Order:    01.12.2022

 

For the complainants:          Mr.B.K.Sinha,Adv.& Associates.

For the O.Ps no.1,3 & 4 :          None.

For the O.P no.2:                   Mr. M.MasilaMani,Adv, & Associates.

 

Sri Debasish Nayak,President

                 Case of the complainant as made out from the complaint petition in short is that she had purchased a mobile phone of model Mi 5, 3/32 through online service of Flipkart by paying a sum of Rs.8,999/- on 22.8.2018.  As because the said mobile phone had some defects and was not functioning properly, she had taken the same mobile phone set to the nearest Mi Service Centre on 5.12.2018, where she was suggested that the mother-board of the mobile phone requires to be changed.  Since the date of activation was not reflected, in the Website, she was suggested to contact the Xiaomi India Care in this regard.  The complainant had thereafter mailed to the said Care Centre for seven times on 14.12.18 and again on 15.12.18,17.12.18 and on 18.12.18.  Thereafter, the complainant had contacted the Flipkart Manager in this regard.  Thus, ultimately when no result yielded, the complainant had to file this case against the O.P claiming the cost of the mobile phone set of Rs.8,999/-, a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- towards her mental agony and suffering, a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards her litigation expenses and further compensation of Rs.20,000/-.

     The complainant has filed copies of documents in order to establish her case.

2.  Out of the four O.Ps as arrayed in this case, O.Ps, no.1,3 & 4 having not contested this case had been set exparte vide order dt.12.4.2022.  However, it is only O.P no.2 who has contested this case and has filed his written version.  According to written version of O.P no.2, the complainant had never approached his Authorised Service Centre about the purchased mobile phone and no information in that regard was found in the system.  Thus, according to the O.P no.2, the complainant has filed a vexatious petition against him which is liable to be dismissed.

3.  Keeping in mind the averments as made in the complaint petition and the contents of the written version of O.P no.2, this Commission thinks it proper to settle the following issues in order to arrive at a proper conclusion.

i.          Whether the case of the complainant is maintainable?

ii.         Whether there was any deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps and if they had practised unfair trade?

iii.        Whether the complainants are entitled to the reliefs as claimed ?

Issue No.ii.

Out of the three issues, Issue no.ii being the most pertinent issue is taken up first for consideration here in this case.

On perusal of the annexures as tagged to the complaint petition of the complainant, it is noticed that infact the complainant had paid a sum of Rs.8,999/- for purchasing Redmi 5, 3GB RAM  32 GB ROM Lake blue mobile phone set.  Annexure-2 is the complaint as made by the complainant which was send set through mail.  She has also provided xerox copies of the reminders and other correspondences as made by her with the O.Psas regards to the non-functional of her mobile phone set.  Thus, it is quite well apparent from the facts and circumstances as available in the case record that by not paying any heed to the grievances of the complainant as regards to the defects of her mobile phone set which was purchased by her on 22.8.2018 and there was complaint made by her to the O.Ps regarding the non-functional of her mobile phone set from 28.8.2018 onwards, the O.Ps were definitely deficient in their service and that also clearly signifies the practice of unfair trade by them.

Issues no.i& iii.

From the above discussions, it is noticed that the case of the complainant as filed is definitely maintainable and the complainant is entitled to the reliefs as claimed by her.  Hence it is so ordered;

                                    ORDER

The case is decreed on contest against O.P no.2 and exparte against O.Ps no.1,3 & 4.  The O.Ps  are found to be jointly and severally liable here in this case.  Thus, they are directed to return the complainant Rs.8,999/- towards the cost of the mobile phone set alongwith interest thereon @ 12% per annum with effect from 23.12.2018 till the amount is quantified.  The O.Ps are also directed to pay a sum of Rs.20,000/- to the complainant as compensation for her mental agony and harassment and to bear the cost of her litigation to the tune of Rs.10,000/-. This order is to be carried out within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

Order pronounced in the open court on the 1^st day of   December,2022 under the seal and signature of this Commission.   

                                                                                                                                Sri Debasish Nayak

                                                                                                                                            President

                                                                                                                                                                  Sri Sibananda Mohanty

                                                                                                                                                Member