CC No.2033.2014

Filed on 04.12.2014

Disposed on 07.01.2017

BEFORE THE III ADDITIONAL BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT

CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,

BENGALURU – 560 027.

DATED THIS THE 7^th DAY OF JANUARY 2017

CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO.2033/2014                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  

PRESENT:

     Sri.  H.S.RAMAKRISHNA B.Sc., LL.B.

             PRESIDENT

                  Smt.L.MAMATHA, B.A., (Law), LL.B.

                           MEMBER

                   Sri.  BALAKRISHNA V.MASALI B.A., LL.B

       MEMBER

                                             V/S

ORDER

BY SMT.L.MAMATHA, PRESIDENT

1. This Complaint was filed by the Complainant on against the Opposite Party u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 praying to pass an order directing the Opposite Party to pay compensation of Rs.25,000/- to the Complainant.    

2. The brief facts of the complaint can be stated as under:

In the Complaint, the Complainant submits that he purchased Celkon mobile phone (A119Q) from Athri Associates, Bangalore on 27.11.2013.   He has been facing problems with it since the time of purchase, there has been a problem with the on/off button and handset freezing/intermittently rebooting, freezing issue while on internet (both 2G and 3G) and intermittent rebooting was happening while using Camera/Gallery.  Only pulling out the battery and rebooting was the solution.  Tried on different service providers like Idea, Vodafone, Airtel and Docomo, still the problem continued.  On 8^th July 2014, gave the phone to service Authorized service partner Mobile Care Center, Jayanagar, Bangalore.  The on/off issue was rectified, however the Complainant lost all the data as the handset was reset to factory conditions by them.  After this, the freezing problem continued and an additional problem started with Bluetooth.  Bluetooth headsets were not recognized.  Gave it back to service center on 19^th July 2014.  The technician said that PCB was not in stock and had to be replaced and will take about 20 days.  After a month on 21^st August 2014, they gave the mobile and Complainant noticed that the PCB was downgraded to A119.  So the Complainant refused to take the handset and asked to rectify the same.  After about 2 weeks, the PCB was replaced with the correct one, but the main problem with Bluetooth still persisted and they said no solution was available with them.   Also the Complainant noticed that the IMEI number had changed and they said that since the PCB was replaced, the IMEI numbers would change.  After waiting for nearly 2 months to get the phone serviced, the Complainant got a phone with different IMEI numbers, Bluetooth media headsets not working and no solutions available with their authorized service center.  Every now and then the Complainant have to lose all data and settings in order to get the phone work properly.  Hence escalated to customer care center and they advised to email the same to customer care center.  As per the directions by their customer care representative, the Complainant wrote an email to address the problem that he facing with his Celkon A 119Q mobile phone and haven’t received any resolution.   It has caused financially loss and Complainant has many contacts due to phone not working/freezing Complainant tossed between customer care and service center without resolution from either side.  Hence, this complaint. 

3.   Even though notice was served on the Opposite Party, the Opposite Party fails to put their appearance, hence placed ex-parte. 

4. In support of the complainant, the complainant has filed his affidavit by way of evidence. Heard arguments of the Complainant.  

5.     The points that arise for consideration are:-

1. Whether the Complainant has proved the alleged deficiency in service by the Opposite Party?
2. If so, to what relief the Complainant is entitled?

6.     Our findings on the above points are:-

                POINT (1):- Negative

                POINT (2):- As per the final Order

REASONS

7.     POINT NO.1: On perusing the pleadings along with documents produced by the Complainant, it reveals that the Opposite Party is the manufacturers of the Celkon mobile phone.  On 27.11.2013 the Complainant purchased Celkon mobile phone (A119Q) from Athri Associates, Bangalore.  It is supported by the Invoice No.3381 Since the time of purchase the Complainant had been facing problems with this mobile phone.  Problems like on/off button and handset freezing intermittently rebooting freezing issue while on internet (both 2G and 3G) and intermittent rebooting was happening while using Camera/Gallery.  The Complainant …….the mobile handset to different service providers like Idea, Vodafone, Airtel and Docomo.  But still the problem continued.  On 8^th July 2014, the Complainant gave the phone to Authorized Service Center of Opposite Party located at Jayanagar, Bangalore.  The on/off issue was rectified, however the Complainant lost all the data as the handset was reset to factory conditions by them.  But freezing problem continued and an additional problem started with Bluetooth.  Bluetooth headsets were not recognized.  On 19^th July 2014.  The Complainant gave his handset back to service center.  The technician said that PCB was not in stock and had to be replaced and will take about 20 days.  On 21^st August 2014, they gave the mobile to Complainant but Complainant noticed that the PCB was downgraded to A119.  So the Complainant refused to take the handset and asked to rectify the same. To substantiate this fact, the Complainant filed his affidavit.  In his sworn testimony, he reiterated the same and also in support of his testimony, he produced invoice, emails, Job sheet.  By looking into these documents, it clearly shows that the Complainant is a purchased Celkon HD119 handset from Athri Associates, Bangalore on 27.11.2013 and paid Rs.12,299/- and he has been facing problem with this mobile.  Though there is deficiency of service on the part of the Opposite Party.  But the Complainant not made Athri Associates as necessary party to the Complainant.  Hence, this point is held in the positive.

8. POINT No.2:- In view of the finding on point No.1, we proceed to pass the following:

ORDER

The Complaint is partly allowed with liberty to file a fresh case by impleading necessary party to the proceedings. 

Supply free copy of this order to both the parties. 

(Dictated to the Stenographer, got it transcribed and corrected, pronounced in the Open Forum on this, 7^th day of January 2017)

       MEMBER                MEMBER           PRESIDENT

LIST OF WITNESSES AND DOCUMENTS

Witness examined on behalf of the Complainant:

1. Sri.Sandeep V, who being Complainant has filed his affidavit.

List of documents filed by the Advocate for Complainant:

1. G-Mails
2. Tax Invoice dt.27.11.20130

Witness examined on behalf of the Opposite Party:

                               -NIL-

  List of documents filed by the Opposite Party:

                       -NIL-

 MEMBER                                                   PRESIDENT