Haryana

Ambala

CC/190/2017

Parveen - Complainant(s)

Versus

City Electronic - Opp.Party(s)

Lakhvinder Singh

08 May 2018

ORDER

 

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM AMBALA

 

                                                          Complaint case no.          : 190 of 2017

                                                          Date of Institution          : 12.06.2017

                                                          Date of decision     :  08.05.2018

 

 

Parveen (Aged: 21 years) son of SHri Jasbir Singh, resident of House No.82/83, New Vivek Vihar, Nerar, Ranjeet Nagar, Ghanaur Road, Ambala City, and permanent resident of village Sarwan Majra, Tehsil Indri, District Karnal.

……. Complainant.

Vs.

 

1.       City Electronic, Booth No.11, Sector-29-D, Chandigarh through its proprietor.

2.       Global Services India Pvt Ltd. Shop No.12, Ist floor, Galaxy Mall, Sector-7, Ambala City, through its Authorised signatory.

3.       Apps Daily Solution Pvt Ltd, Sector-22-D, Chandigarh through its Auhtorised  signatory.

4.       Apple India Pvt Ltd 19^th Floor, Concorde Tower-C, UB City, No.24, Vittal Mallya Road, Bangalore-560001 (Karnatka)

 

 ….….Opposite Parties.

 

Before:        Sh. D.N. Arora, President.

                   Sh. Pushpender  Kumar, Member.               

                   Ms. Anamika Gupta, Member.

 

 

Present:       Sh. Lakhwinder Singh, counsel for complainant .

Sh. Rajeev Sachdeva, counsel for OP No.4.

Op Nos. 1 to 3 already ex parte.

.

 

ORDER:

In nutshell, brief facts of the present complaint is that the complainant had purchased a new Mobile set i.e. Apple Model-I-7, IMEI No.359154072447438 on 14.10.2016 for Rs. 60,000/- vide bill no.3791 having warranty of one year from the OP No.1 and get insured by the OP No.3  on the same day. After one month from the purchase of the said mobile, the mobile started giving  trouble as it screen  started having blank and the mobile  became out of function/out of order and became defective. On the advice of the OP No.1, the complainant approached the OP No.2 and told that the mobile is giving above said problem.  On seeing the mobile and retained the same for some time, the OP No.2 told that it is unable to turn on the phone device not powering on and stated because of liquid damage and though the mobile is in warranty period, but the OP no.2 asked the complainant that charged of Rs. 25,000/-(appro.) are to be charged, which the complainant have to pay.  After that when the complainant contacted the OP No.3 who told that it is not the responsibility of the OP No.3 and flatly refused to compensate the complainant regarding damage of his phone.  The complainant  approached the Ops several times and requested to repair  or replace the mobile phone set in question but Ops always putting off him by one way or the other  and even a legal notice dated 23.1.2017 was also  issued by the complainant through his counsel. Thus, the Ops have failed to provide proper service to the complainant. There is clear cut deficiency in service of the Ops. Hence, the present  complaint. 

2.                Registered notices issued to Op Nos.1 &3 but none have turned up on their behalf and they were proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 31.07.2017. Upon notice, OP No.4 appeared through counsel and tendered written statement and stated that the complainant approached OP2 on 07.02.2017 and complained about the defects pertaining to the device. They diagnosed the device and performed VMI test on the same. It was detected that the device was damaged with liquid thus the LCI turned red. It is pertinent to mention that the OP4 are liable to offer repair or replacement service to all their users for one year (from the date of purchase of device), provided the users follow the terms and conditions mentioned therein. In the present case the complainant failed to comply with the warranty provision, he damaged the product with liquid. Therefore, OP4 are not liable to repair or replace the disputed device for free of cost. The same can be repaired by paying the charges or cost determined to repair the same. So, there is no deficiency in service on the part of OP No.4 and prayed for dismissal of the present complaint.

3.               To prove his version complainant tendered his affidavit as Annexure C-A with documents as annexure C-1 to C-6 and close his evidence. On the other hand, Counsel for the OP No.4 tendered affidavit as Annexure R-A along with Annexure R-1 to R-3 and close his evidence. Ops no. 1 to 3 already proceeded ex parte.

4.                We have heard learned counsels for both the parties and carefully gone through the case file. It  is not disputed that the complainant had purchases a mobile set apple model –I-7 IMEI No.359154072447438  on 14.10.2016 for amounting to Rs. 60,000/- vide invoice no.3791 from OP No.1 and it is not disputed the above said  mobile was insured by the OP No.3. The grievance of the complainant is that after purchase of the said mobile it started giving trouble and screen went blank automatically and mobile become out of function. The complainant approached to the OP No.2 for rectification of the same. The service centre has mentioned in the job sheet Annexure C-1, Physical status such as minor scratch, liquid damage LCI red and diagnosis details i.e. device liquid damage, customer not agreed to replace the device in exchange price, device returned to the customer on customer demand and general problem has also been shown i.e. unable to turn on the phone device not powering on. The complainant has placed on record damage handset declaration given to Apps Daily Solution by the complainant wherein it is clearly mentioned that “in case device is found completely damaged or Beyond Economic Repair(BER) by Apps Daily at any stage, the deductible will be applicable as per policy for BER, if my device is found to completely damaged or Beyond Economic Repair(BER) during repair, then I agree to pay the excess deductible amount before Apps  Daily provide me replacement handset.  In case device is returned without repair, Apps Daily will retain Rs.500 and refund remaining amount in my account”. It is clear from the afore said document, if any handset found completely damage the Apps Daily Co. may deduct the depreciation of the mobile set and company will replace the handset but how much deduction would be made is not mentioned in the terms and conditions of this document. It is worthwhile to mention hereby that the mobile in question got damaged within five months of its purchase and the Ops have not produced any evidence to show that the damage got occurred due to mishandling of the handset by the complainant. Since, the mobile in question is insured with the OP No.3, therefore, being an insurer it is the duty of the insurance company to indemnify the loss if suffered within the warranty period.

5.                Perusal of the Annexure C-3 reveals that in case device is returned without repair Apps Daily will retain Rs.500 and refund the remaining amount and in the present complaint the device not repaired by the service centre. It is not disputed that the mobile in question have become damaged within warranty period, therefore, we have no hesitation to reach at conclusion that the present complaint is hereby allowed against OP No.3 only with cost and dismissed against the OPs No.1, 2 & 4 and insurance company (OP No.3) is directed to comply with the following directions within thirty days from receipt of copy of the order:-

1. To pay the amount of Rs. 60,000/- after deducting the amount of the Rs. 500 as mentioned in Annexure C-3 within stipulated period failing which the amount would carry interest at the rate of 9% per annum for the defaulted period subject to returning of handset along with its accessories by the complainant within 15 days to OP No.3 from the date of order.  
2. Also to pay a sum of Rs.3,000/- on account of mental harassment & agony along with cost of litigation.

 

                   Copy of the order be sent to the parties concerned, free of costs, as per rules. File after due compliance be consigned to record room.

Announced on :08.05.2018                       

 

 

 

 

(PUSHPENDER KUMAR)     (ANAMIKA GUPTA)     (D.N. ARORA)

          Member                              Member                         President