THE COURT OF DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL COMMISSION
WEST SINGHBHUM AT CHAIBASA
Present: - 1. Sri Vijai Kumar Sharma, President,
2. Sri Rajiv Kumar, Member.
3. Smt. Deoshree Choudhary, Member,
C. C. Case No.13/2014
Chaibasa, Dated: 12.07.2022
Vijay Kumar Gope, S/o Krishna Chandra Gope, Village Sardiha, Tola Kalimati, P.O. & P.S Hatgamharia, District West Singhbhum, Jharkhand…..…Complainant
Vs.
- Karbonn Mobiles, D – 170, Okhla Industrial Area, Phase 1, New Delhi.
- Ambica Mobile, Kendposhi More, P.O. & P.S Hatgamharia, District West Singhbhum, Jharkhand ……………………………...…………Opposite Party
Learned Counsel for the Complainant………….Krishna Chandra Mahato
Learned Counsel for the Opposite Party No.1 …………..Mr. Amresh Kumar Sao
Learned Counsel for the Opposite Party No.2………………… None
Judgment
This case has been filed by the complainant Vijay Kumar Gope against O.P. Karbonn Mobiles and others for and award of Rs.2300.00 and further for an award of Rs.1000000.00 as compensation towards mental and physical harassment showing deficiency of service by O.Ps.
Briefly stated case of the complainant Vijay Kumar Gope, S/o Krishna Chandra Gope, Village Sardiha, Tola Kalimati, P.O. & P.S Hatgamharia, District West Singhbhum, Jharkhand is that on 24.02.2013 he purchased a Mobile Phone of Karbonn Mobiles Company which was having Model No.K440. Further on 12.02.2014 at about 7 A.M. when he had put his mobile for charging then due to blast in mobile he sustained injury on his left hand as well as he felt electricity current in his whole body and he got hospitalized and he remained there for 17 days and during treatment his left thumb was removed by the attending doctor and he continued in treatment for 3 months and in this way he became permanent disabled person due to blast of mobile and accordingly he has prayed for an award of Rs.2300.00 and further for an award of Rs.1000000.00 as compensation towards mental and physical harassment and bodily injury.
After admission notice was issued to the O.P. and O.P. No.1 has appeared through Jaina Marketing & Associates and show-cause was filed on behalf of the O.P. No.1 while Parwati Kumari has appeared showing O.P. No.2 and Vakalatnama and adjournment petition was also filed seeking time for filing show-cause in this case but show-cause was not filed on behalf of O.P. No.2 despite giving sufficient opportunity then vide order dated 10.11.2017 she has been debarred from filing show-cause in this case on the other hand O.P. No.1 filed show-cause in this case.
On perusal of the show-cause it transpires that O.P. No.1 has contested the case on the ground of facts and law further mentioning ground that O.P. is not consumer as defined under the provision of Consumer Protection Act ground of ground of maintainability, lack of cause of action, vexatious, frivolous have also been taken in this case further that it is not clear from the complainant side that burnt injury to complainant has been caused by a mobile charger rather it is possible that injury may be caused due to excess current or torn wire. Further that there is no relation of mobile charger regarding treatment of complainant which laid to amputation of thumb of the complainant. Further that case of the complainant is bad in law and liable to be dismissed because purchased mobile by the complainant K440 Model is a popular model of Karbonn Mobiles which is most commonly used in most of the Karbonn Mobiles Model and further that company has sold Lakh of such charger and thousands of such model mobile phone without any complaints and as has been alleged by the complainant in present case.
Further that complaint has been lodged by complainant after purchase of almost one year. So it is also not maintainable and finally prayer has been made to dismiss the complaint with cost.
After show-cause case, was fixed for complainant evidence and complainant has filed his affidavited evidence along with affidavit of his brother Sanjay Kumar Gope in addition to that documentary evidence has also been adduced on behalf of the complainant which are as follows:-
- Original Receipt of Ambica Mobile in the name of ComplainantVijay Gope dated 24.02.2013 for Rs.2300.00 showing Karbonn Mobile Model No.K440 which is marked as exhibit 1.
- Original Copy of M.G.M. Medical College Hospital Jamshedpur Discharge Report Registration No.EPS/2002 dated 01.03.2014 in the name of Vijay Kumar Gope which is marked as exhibit 2.
- Original Receipt of Ganga Memorial Hospital & Research Centre Dimna Road Sankhosai – 4, near Project Colony BSNL Tower (Jamshedpur - 18) Regd. No.3270 dated 22.4.2014 in the name of Vijay Kumar Gope which is marked as exhibit 3.
- Xerox Copy of Cash Memo of Ganga Memorial Hospital & Research Centre Dimna Road Sankhosai – 4, near Project Colony BSNL Tower (Jamshedpur - 18) dated 22.04.2014 in the name of Vijay Kumar Gope which is marked as exhibit 4.
- Xerox Copy of receipt of Ganga Memorial Hospital & Research Centre Jamshedpur dated 23.04.2014 for Rs.8000.00 in the name of Vijay Kumar Gope which is marked as exhibit 5.
On the other hand neither affidavited evidence nor documentary evidences has been adduced on behalf of the O.P. in support of the show-cause. Then after hearing case has been fixed for judgment.
FINDING
On perusal of the complainant petition of the complainant which has been filled in prescribed format as well as in hand written petition, complaint petition of the complainant goes to shows that he has purchased a mobile of Karbonn Mobile company having model number K440 on 24.02.2013 from the shop of O.P no.2. Further that on 12.02.2014 at about 7:00a.m he had put his mobile for charge in electricity plug and during charging of the mobile his thumb of left hand got injured due to running of the electricity current in his body. Further that due to such occurrence he got admitted in the hospital and remained hospitalized for 17 days and during treatment his left thumb was amputated and due to such amputation and injures caused during charging of mobile he became disabled and also not able to do work in natural way, rather he has faced severe inconvenience in discharging his day today work and he has prayed for proper compensation from the O.Ps and in prescribed format he has shown price of purchased mobile Rs:2300.00 and compensation for Rs:10 lakh from O.Ps.
In support of the averment mentioned in the complaint petition complainant has adduced his affidavited evidence as well as affidavited evidence of his wife Geeta Devi and affidavited evidence of his brother Sanjay Kumar Gope and on perusal of the affidavited evidence adduced by the complainant the averment of the complaint petition has been supported by complainant as well as above named two witnesses and further it has been stated by the complainant as well as witnesses that the alligation alleged by the O.P in show cause are false febricated and concocted and that should not be accepted rather being denied by the complainant and other witnesses. These witness have been cross examined by the counsel of the O.Ps.
On perusal of the documentry evidences we find that complainant has filed original Cash memo regarding purchase of the Karbonn Mobile, which has been marked Exhibit 1. This document shows that O.P no.2 Ambika Mobile, situated at kendposhi more, District West Singhbhum, Jharkhand has issued the same Cash memo in the name of complainant on 24.02.2013 and Rs: 2300/- only has been paid by the complainant to sales man and signature of the Parwati has been put on Exhibit 1. Barcode of the, above mentioned, mobile and model number has been pasted on cash memo which is clear proof of purchase of mobile in question from O.P. no.02. Complainant has also filed original medical treatment papers and diagnosis bill and payment receipt which has been marked in this case as Exhibit 2 (Discharge report), Exhibit 3(discharge ticket), Exhibit 4(bill regarding pathological report of complainant) Exhibit 5(bill of Ganga memorial hospital & research centre) issued in favour of complainant on 23.04.2014 and endorsement of paid has been mentioned on the bill.
It is worthy to mention that O.P has not adduced any paper in support of the show cause.
Further perusal of the exhibit 1it is clear that mobile in question was purchased by the complainant from the shop of O.P number 2 for which he has paid Rs: 2300, exhibit 2 which is discharge report which goes to show that complainant was admitted in MGM medical College Jamshedpur on 13.02.2014 and he was discharged from the hospital on 01.03.2014, disease has been mentioned as electricity burn and also this fact has been mentioned that left thumb was amputated. Exhibit 3 is discharge ticket which mentions that Dr.L (sir name not eligible) has given treatment to patient who is complainant of this case regarding thumb treatment and procedures of treatment has also been mentioned along with medicine to be taken by the patient and follow up date has been mentioned in the discharge ticket. Exhibit 4 shows that Rs: 770.00 has been paid by the complainant with respect to his pathological examination on 22.04.2014 and Exhibit 5 also show that payment of Rs: 8000/ has been made by the complainant.
On perusal of show cause filed on behalf of O.P number 1 we find that O.P has denied the allegation made by the complainant regarding bad service of mobile which is well stablished and reputed brand in the field of market and company has got a strict quality and check policy and each of its device and accessories is not only certified to be safe by design and certification but also goes through accrual inspection and checks before being dispatched to the market. Further it has been mentioned in the Show Cause that model purchased by the complainant is a popular model and comes with charger which is most commonly used in most of the Karbonn Mobile. Further that company has sold lakh of such chargers and thousands of such phone model without any complaint of the nature alleged in the instant case. Further that Had there been any defect in design specifications or manufacturing of the product similar complaint would have been reported from other consumers located all over India. Further that since there is no any such report against the product of company, which shows that there is no any inherent defect in product (Para10, 11, 12 of show cause).
Although O.P has denied the allegation of the complainant and it has been mentioned that company used to take reasonable precautions regarding safety of the mobile before sending the same in market but in support of the above contention neither any expert nor any employee of the manufacturer of the mobile has been examined in this case to prove the above facts. Similarly allegation of the O.P that had there been any defect in design specifications or manufacturing of the product similar complaint would have been reported from other consumers, because O.P has not produced any relevant evidence in this regard, so his contention can be accepted in this case.
On the other hand in support of the complaint petition and allegation complainant has adduced affidavited and documentary evidences which clearly shows that mobile in question was purchased by the complainant and same mobile was blast during charging period and due to such blast complainant got injured in his left thumb and he was hospitalized in hospital for 17 days and ultimately his left thumb was amputated by the attending Doctor to save his life. It is also worthy to mention that complainant and his brother Sanjay Kumar Gope has been cross examined on behalf of O.P and in para 21 complainant has clearly confirmed the fact that the charger was in good condition and being charged and this occurrence took place within 11 and half month from the date of purchase. He has denied suggestion that in the alleged accident there is no role of mobile, battery and charger. Further another witness Sanjay Kumar Gope has confirmed the fact in para 13 of cross examine that he was present at the time of occurrence. Further that mobile charger was in good condition. Further Exihibit-1 mentions date of purchase as on 24.02.2013 and occurrence has been shown complainant as on 12.02.2014 which shows that occurrence has taken place within one year of purchase of mobile.
On the basis of above discussion and finding we have arrived at conclusion that complainant has proved his case by trust, worthy through affidavited and documentary evidences and he has also denied the suggestion given by learned counsel of O.P during cross examination. So further we are of the view that complainant is entitled to get relief in this case and his case is worthy for decree.
Accordingly it is therefore
ORDER
That Case of the complainant is decreed on contest against Opposite Parties. Further O.Ps are hereby directed to pay Rs: 2300.00 (twenty three hundred only)@9% interest from the date of filing till final realization, Further to pay Rs: 10,000.00(Ten thousand) as litigation Cost and Rs: 100000.00(One lakh) as mental and Physical injuring in this case to Complainant. Further O.P No.1 & 2 are directed to pay the award amount to the complainant within 30 days from the judgment communicated to them. Let copy of this judgment be furnished to both parties free of cost for their information and compliance.
(Rajiv Kumar) (Smt. Deoshree choudhary) (Vijai Kumar Sharma)
Member Member President
