Delhi

North East

CC/440/2022

Mukesh Bansal - Complainant(s)

Versus

Chaudhary Enterprises - Opp.Party(s)

27 Sep 2023

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION: NORTH-EAST

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

D.C. OFFICE COMPLEX, BUNKAR VIHAR, NAND NAGRI, DELHI-93

 

Complaint Case No. 440/22

 

 

In the matter of:

 

	Sh. Mukesh Bansal S/o Sh. Om Prakash Bansal, R/o H.No. E-72, St. No. 10, Brahampuri, Delhi 110053	Complainant
	Versus
	Chaudhary Enterprises A165/2, Main Road, Brahampuri, Ghonda, Delhi-110053	Opposite Party

 

DATE OF INSTITUTION:        JUDGMENT RESERVED ON:             DATE OF ORDER:

13.12.22 27.07.23 27.09.23

 

CORAM:

Surinder Kumar Sharma, President

Anil Kumar Bamba, Member

ORDER

Anil Kumar Bamba, Member

The Complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer protection Act, 2019.

Case of the Complainant

1. The facts of the case as revealed from the record are that the Complainant purchased a mobile phone from Opposite Party on 21.10.22 for a sum of                 Rs. 8,999/-. The Complainant stated that after 1 to 1.5 months from the date of purchase of said mobile phone its touch screen was not working properly sometimes and also there was problem in the sound of the said mobile phone and the said mobile phone became non-functional. The Complainant stated that he had visited the service centre 3-4 times but the problems in his mobile phone were not resolved. Hence, this shows deficiency on the part of Opposite Party. The Complainant has prayed either to pay the cost of the mobile phone or to replace the phone. He further prayed for Rs. 10,000/- for mental harassment and                Rs. 5,000/- as litigation expenses.  
2. None has appeared on behalf of Opposite Party to contest the case despite service of notice. Therefore, Opposite Party was proceeded against Ex-parte vide order dated 01.03.23.

Ex-parte Evidence of the Complainant

3. The Complainant in support of his complaint filed his affidavit wherein he has supported the averments made in the complaint.

Arguments and Conclusion

4. We have heard the Complainant in person and we have also perused the file. The averments made by the Complainant in the complaint are supported by his affidavit and documents filed by him. The Opposite Party did not appear and did not file any written statement. Therefore, the averments made in the complaint are to be believed.
5. In view of the above discussion, the complaint is allowed. The Complainant is directed to hand over the mobile phone in question to the Opposite Party and on the receipt of the mobile phone in question the Opposite Party is directed to pay the cost of the mobile phone i.e. Rs. 8,999/- to the Complainant along with interest @ 9 % p.a. from the date of filing the complaint till recovery. The Opposite Party is further directed to pay Rs. 5,000/- to the Complainant on account of mental harassment and litigation expenses with interest @ 9 % p.a. from the date of this order till recovery.
6. Order announced on 27.09.23.

Copy of this order be given to the parties free of cost.

File be consigned to Record Room.

 

(Anil Kumar Bamba)           Member

(Surinder Kumar Sharma) President