SRI R.S.NAYAK, MEMBER …                The brief history of case is that, the complainant had purchased a mobile, Samsung Model-1200, bearing IMEI No.356363084762428 on dated 08.02.2017 from the OP.no.1 for Rs.1200/-. But within lapse of 1 & 1/2 months the mobile shows network problems, so the complainant approached the OP.no.2 for repair, who repaired the same and handed over the same to the complainant. But in the month of July’2017 the set again reported the same problem, so he further mends the same through OP.2 but could not be rectified. So the complainant contended that the OP.s has provided him a defective set, hence there is deficiency in service by them. Hence the complainant harassed, inflicting upon great mental strain, physical pain and financial losses craves leave of this forum and prayed to direct the OP.s to return a same new handset and a sum of Rs.20,000/- as compensation and cost of Rs.7,000/-. 

2.         The counsel for OP.No.2 & 3 entered his appearance and filed counter to contend that, the case is not maintainable as the complainant approached this forum not with clean hands. The allegation of inherent manufacturing defect is without supporting or relying any expert report. The contentions of complainant are self explanatory, false & frivolous and the complainant should have put the same with strict proof. The complainant is not a consumer as the instant dispute is not a consumer dispute. He further contends that there is no deficiency in service on the part of OP.s, so prayed to dismiss the case with cost.

3.         The complainant has filed copy of invoice of the set and a service job card. The counsel for OP.2 & 3 has filed nothing except his respective combined counter. Case has been minutely heard from them and submissions considered.

4.         From the above submissions, it reveals that the complainant has procured the above said mobile on dt.08.02.2017 from the OP.1 and the same reported defect with in valid warranty period. It is seen that, the complainant time and again approached the OP.s reporting the so called defects, but the OP.s neither rectified the set nor replaced the same with a new one. Perusing the evidences, submissions by the complainant, we are of the concerned view that, the mobile set purchased by the complainant is defective product and the OP.3 being the manufacturer failed to render any service to the complainant within valid warranty period. Thus the complainant suffered from mental strain and physical pain with the defective set and also inflicted financial losses and valuable times for the negligence and unfair practices of OP.s, hence he takes shelter of this forum and prayed for appropriate compensation.

5.         From the above discussions and after perusing the submissions filed by the complainant, it is apparent that, the OP.s in spite of receiving notice of this forum are failed to take any initiations to settle the case of complainant and there is nothing wrong in the contentions of complainant, as well as the OP.3 defiance the claim of complainant in an unilateral manner, so we feel that the action of OP.3 is illegal, arbitrary and unfair which amounts to deficiency in service, hence found guilty under the provisions laid down in C.P.Act 1986, as thus the complainant is entitled to get compensation to overcome the stigma. Observing manufacture defect in the said product, the complaint is allowed against OP.no.3 with costs.  

                                                                           ORDER

i.          The opposite party no.3 supra is hereby directed to return a same new mobile set or pay the cost of the mobile set Rs.1200/- (Rupees One thousand & two hundred) in place of alleged defective mobile set, besides, to pay Rs.2,000/-(Two thousand) as compensation for deficiency in service, inter alia, to pay Rs.500/- (Five hundred) as the cost of litigation to the complainant.

ii.         All the above directions shall be complied with in 30 days of this order, failing which, the total sum will bear 12% interest per annum till its realization. Pronounced on this the 30th day of May' 2018.

                      MEMBER                                                       PRESIDENT

Memo No.______________DF                       Dt.______________

Copy to the Parties concerned.

                                                                                             PRESIDENT, DCDRF,

                                                                                                  NABARANGPUR