IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KOLLAM
DATED THIS THE 21stDAY OF MAY 2020
Present: - Sri.E.M.Muhammed Ibrahim, B.A, LLM. President
Smt.S.Sandhya Rani. Bsc, LLB ,Member
Sri.Stanly Harold, B.A.LLB, Member
CC.No.291/2019
Sunil Suresh, 25 years,
S/o Suresh Kumar,
Sunil Nivas, Kampivila, : Complainant
KottiyamP.O.,Kollam District.
(By Adv.S.Manoj)
V/S
Branch Manager,
My G Care,
Door No.01/1206-453D
Madathil Complex,
Pallimukku,
Eravipuram P.O.,
Kollam District.
FAIR ORDER
Sri.Stanly Harold, B.A.LLB, Member
This is a case based on a consumer complaint filed under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.
The averments in the complaint in short are as follows.
The Complainant had purchased a mobile phone TA-1046 Nokia 7 Plus DS 4GB+64GB white Nokia model on 14.05.2018worth Rs.25,999/-. Thereafter in the course of usage of the mobile phone he noticed a complaint in the charging port of the mobile phone. The complainant has approached the opposite party shop for rectifying the said defect. The complainant has paid Rs.1200/- as the service charge of the mobile phone and the opposite party had promised the complainant that they will rectify charging port defect and the mobile phone will be returned on the same day evening itself. The opposite party has given a job sheet bearing No.No.JS/KLM/386 dated 25.11.2019 in respect of the service of the mobile. According to the complainant at about 3 p.m. the opposite party intimated over phone that at the time of repairing the charging port of the mobile phone the display of the said phone had been broken. The complainant had told the opposite party that the said mobile phone is having the defect in charging port only and no other defects. It is alleged by the complainant that the opposite party has taken an indifferent attitude and further he demanded that the complainant has to pay Rs.3,800/-to rectify phone in working condition.The opposite party has also told the complainant only if Rs.5,000/- is remitted he would return the said mobile.According to the complainant the opposite party claims through day today advertisement over media regarding their service centre and about the skilled technicians in the said service centre. Complainant being attracted and having believed on the above said advertisement approached the opposite party for servicing the mobile. But the above act of the opposite party caused much mental agony and monitory loss to him.Thereafter the father of the complainant issued a legal notice to the opposite party demanding to service the mobile phone in a proper manner and return the same in its previous condition. The opposite party was not willing for the same. According to the complainant the aforesaid mobile phone was not serviced properly, also it was damaged by the opposite party and not returned the same. Hence the complaint.
Though notice issued from the forum was served on the opposite party he has neither appeared before the Forum nor filed any version. Hence the opposite party set exparte.
The complainant filed affidavit by reiterating the averments in the complainant and got marked Ext.P1to Ext.P5 documents.
Heard the counsel for the complainant and perused the records. Ext.P1 is the tax invoice bill of supply dated 11.05.2018 issued by Amazon. Ext.P2 is the job sheet issued by opposite party on 25.11.2019. Ext.P3 is the notice dated 26.11.2019 issued by father of the complainant. Ext.P4 is the postal receipt. Ext.P5 postal acknowledgment card.
The unchallenged averments in the affidavit coupled with Ext.P1 to Ext.P5 would establish the case of the complainant. In the view of the materials available on the records it is clear that there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party, as the opposite party failed to rectify the charging port of the mobile phone of the complainant as well as not returning the mobile phone to the complainant. It is also clear from the available materials that in view of deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party the complainant has sustained mental agony apart from monitory loss. In the circumstances the complainant is entitled to get back the mobile in the working condition or in the alternative entitled to get a brand new mobile having similar facility and also entitled to get a reasonable compensation for the mental agony from the opposite party.
In the result the complaint stands allowed directing the opposite party to return the TA-1046 Nokia 7 Plus DS 4GB+64GB white Nokia phone in a working condition or to replace the same by providing a brand new mobile phone having similar facility and model also pay Rs.10,000/- as compensation along with interest @ 9 % per annum from the date of the complainant till the realization.
The Opposite party is directed to comply with the above directions within 30 days from the receipt of a copy of this order failing which the complaint is entitled to realize the value of a brand new mobile phone of the same type amounting to Rs.25999/- and compensation Rs.10,000/-along with interest at the rate of 12 % per annum from the date of complaint till realization from the opposite party and its assets by filing EP U/s 25 of the Consumer Protection Act.
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant Smt.Minimol S. transcribed and typed by her corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 21stday of May 2020.
E.M .MUHAMMED IBRAHIM:Sd/-
S.SANDHYA RANI:Sd/-
STANLY HAROLD:Sd/-
Forwarded/by Order
Senior Superintendent
INDEX
Witnesses Examined for the Complainants:-NIL
Documents marked for the complainant
Ext.P1:-Tax invoice bill dated 11.05.2018
Ext.P2:- Job sheet dated 25.11.2019
Ext.P3:- Notice dated 26.11.2019
Ext.P4:-Postal receipt
Ext.P5:- Postal acknowledgment card
Witness examined for the opposite party:-Nil
Documents marked for the opposite party:-Nil
E.M.MuhammedIbrahim:Sd/-
S.SandhyaRani:Sd/-
Stanly Harold:Sd/-
Forwarded/by Order
Senior Superintendent
