Kerala

Thiruvananthapuram

CC/199/2020

Vishnu Prasad V P - Complainant(s)

Versus

CEO/MD-Asustek - Opp.Party(s)

29 Apr 2022

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION VAZHUTHACADU THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

 

PRESENT

  SRI.P.V.JAYARAJAN    : PRESIDENT

SMT.PREETHA.G.NAIR  : MEMBER

                                  SRI.VIJU.V.R                  : MEMBER

CC.NO.199/2020 (Filed on : 12.10.2020)

ORDER DATED :29.04.2022

COMPLAINANT

        Vishnuprasad.V.P

        AERA-72,
        Arayalloor Ellurial,

        Thirumala.P.O

        Pin code – 695006

 

       (Party in person)                                            VS

OPPOSITE PARTIES

1. CEO/MD-ASUS Tek,

AC, Supreme Chambers,

1718, Veera Desai Road,

Industrial Area, Andheri Post,

Mumbai, Maharashtra, Pin – 400072

 

2. The Services Manager/ Teamhead,

FI Info Solutions & Services,

Pvt Ltd, TC.11.637/-11,

Lowebains, Compound World.P.O

Museum-Nanthancode Road,

Kowdiar, Thiruvananthapuram – 695003

( Exparte)

ORDER

SRI.P.V.JAYARAJAN    : PRESIDENT

       1.    This complaint is filed under section 35 of Consumer Protection Act 2019 and stood over to this date for consideration and this Commission passed the following order.

       2.    The case of the complainant in short is that in the month of November 2019 the complainant purchased an Asus mobile phone from the opposite party by paying Rs.37,999/- (Rupees thirty seven thousand nine hundred and ninety nine only). From the date of purchase of the said mobile phone, within seven months the mobile phone became defective and immediately the complainant took the product to authorized service centre and after repair the product was returned to the complainant stating that the defect has been rectified.  Subsequently again the very same defect was occurred to the mobile phone and another complaint was registered to the Customer Care Centre of the opposite party and expressed the unhappiness of the complainant as the product was showing frequent defect. The complainant requested the opposite party to replace the mobile phone with a fresh one as the already purchased product is showing frequent defects. All these complaints were occurred within one year from the date of purchase of the product by paying Rs.37,999/- to the opposite party. As the opposite parties not properly responded to the complainant's grievances or rectified the defects in the product, alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice, the complainant approached this Commission for redressing his grievances.

              3.  After admitting the complaint, notice was issued to the opposite parties. The second opposite party after accepting the notice, not appeared before this Commission on the date fixed for appearance or on subsequent dates and hence second opposite party was set exparte by this Commission on 05.11.2021. The notice issued to the first opposite party was returned with endorsement "Door locked" and hence the complainant was directed to take steps. Notice was again issued to the first opposite party. The said notice was returned with endorsement "addressee refused". As the notice was refused by first opposite party, the service of process against first opposite party is completed and first opposite party was called absent and set exparte by this Commission on 13.12.2021.

          4.       The evidence in this case consists of PW1, Exts.P1 to P3. As the opposite parties were declared exparte there is no oral or documentary evidence on the side of the opposite parties.

 

Points to be considered

1. Whether there is any deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite parties ?
2. Whether the complainant is entitled to get the relief claimed in the complaint?
3. Order as to cost?

              5.  Heard. Perused records and affidavit. In order to prove the case of the complainant Exts.P1 to P3 were marked on the side of the complainant. Ext.P1 is the copy of tax invoice. Ext.P2 is the service job card. Ext.P3 is the copy of mail. There is no contra evidence from the side of the opposite parties. In the absence of any contra evidence from the side of the opposite parties, the evidence adduced by the complainant stands unchallenged. We find that the complainant has succeeded in establishing his case against the opposite parties. In the absence of any contra evidence from the side of the opposite parties we accept the evidence adduced by the complainant. We find that there is deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite parties which has caused mental agony and financial loss to the complainant. As the mental agony and financial loss was due to the deficiency in service and unfair trade practice and unfair practice on the part of the opposite parties, the opposite parties are liable to compensate the complainant. In view of the above discussions, we find that this is a fit case to be allowed in favour of the complainant.

                 In the result, the complaint is partly allowed. The opposite parties are jointly and severally directed to refund Rs.37,999/- with 6% interest from 07.11.2019. Apart from this, the opposite parties are also directed to pay Rs.10,000/- as compensation to the complainant along with Rs.2500/- being the cost of this proceedings within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order, failing which the amount except cost shall carry interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of this order till the date of remittance / realization. After complying the order, the opposite parties are entitled to get back the mobile phone from the complainant by issuing a proper receipt for the same.

               A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties free of charge and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room.

        Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Commission, this the 29^th day of April 2022.

                                                                                             Sd/-

                                          P.V.JAYARAJAN    : PRESIDENT

                                          Sd/-                              

                                                        PREETHA G NAIR      : MEMBER

                                                                                        Sd/-

                                                                                VIJU.V.R           : MEMBER

 

 

 

 

 

Be/

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

INDEX

CC.NO.199/2020

List of witness for the complainant

PW1                      - Vishnuprasad.V.P

List of Exhibits for the complainant

Ext.P1                   - copy of tax invoice

Ext.P2                   - service job card

Ext.P3                   - copy of mail

List of witness for the opposite parties – NIL

List of exhibits for the opposite parties - NIL

 

                                                                                                                Sd/-

PRESIDENT

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

BEFORE THE DISTRICT

 CONSUMER DISPUTES

REDRESSAL COMMISSION

 VAZHUTHACADU

THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

 

 

CC.NO.199/2020

ORDER DATED :29.04.2022