Haryana

Ambala

CC/64/2015

Rajiv Kumar - Complainant(s)

Versus

Crystal Communication - Opp.Party(s)

03 Jun 2015

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, AMBALA.

   Complaint Case No.      : 64 of 2015

   Date of Institution         : 03.03.2015

   Date of Decision            : 03.06.2015

Rajiv Kumar son of Shri Nathu Ram resident of H.No.470, Mahesh Nagar, Ambala Cantt, District Ambala

                                                                                       ……Complainant.

Versus

1.       Crystal Communication, 53 Mahesh Nagar, Ambala Cantt through its Proprietor.

2.       Karbonn Mobile Service Centre, Opposite Ashoka Diary, Behind Nigar Cinema, Ambala Cantt. through its Manager.

3.       Jaina Marketing & Associates, D-170, Okhla Road, Industrial Area, Phase-I, New Delhi, 110020 India through its M.D.                                                          

……Opposite Parties.

Complaint Under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.

CORAM:    SH. A.K. SARDANA, PRESIDENT.

                   SH. S.C. SHARMA, MEMBER.                                     

Present:            Complainant in person.

                        Sh. Gajender Chandel, Area Service Manager Op No.3 with Sh. Mohit Tayal, Adv.

OP No.1 in person.

None for OP No.2.

 

ORDER.

1.                Complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act with the averments that he purchased the mobile phone of Karbonn Company bearing IMEI No.911359106809328 & 911359106809336 from OP No.1 on 20.10.2014 vide invoce No.2 of Rs.1890/- and the aforesaid mobile set was having warranty of one year i.e. upto 20.11.2015 but abovesaid mobile started giving problem like ‘automatic change of ring tone and automatic internet access’ problem etc. on 20.11.2014 i.e. just after one month. On 23.11.2014, complainant went to the service centre of OP company and the official present at the service centre got deposited the mobile phone of the complainant and apprised him to come back after 3 days but the problem could not rectified by them even after 3 days and as such  the mobile set was returned to the complainant. Thereafter, the complainant many a times approached the service centre of OP company  at Ambala Cantt but no solution.  Hence, the complainant preferred the present complaint seeking relief as mentioned in prayer clause of complaint.

2.                Upon notice Ops No.1 and 3 appeared whereas none appeared on behalf of OP No.2.  However, on 19.05.2015, during the proceedings of the case, representative of OP company i.e. Sh. Gajender Chandel, Area Service Manager appeared on behalf of OP company and tendered a statement that they are ready to replace the mobile-set  in question with new one  subject to deposition of old mobile set alongwith its accessories whereas the complainant  did not accepted the same rather  tendered a statement that he is not willing to take the mobile of OP company as he wants refund of the cost of mobile set alongwith compensation as prayed in the complainant because he is not satisfied by the instrument as well as services provided by the Op-company.

    3.               After hearing both the parties and going through the record as well as statements tendered by the parties, it is admitted  fact on record  that the mobile in dispute was purchased by the complainant from Op No.1 on 20.10.2014 which  was having warranty of one year i.e. upto 20.11.2015 and it became defective prior to 20.11.2014.  Complainant approached many a times to the service centre of Op company but no any  solution was made by Ops which is admittedly a deficiency in service on the part of Ops. Further the version of the complainant is also fortified from the job sheet vide which the complainant got deposited the mobile set in question with the OP No.2 i.e. service centre of the OP company but the same has not been returned till today by the Ops to the complainant.

                   So, from the facts narrated above, we have come to the conclusion that the mobile set in question became defective just after a month of its purchase and the complainant approached the Ops for removing the defects but the Ops failed to rectify the defect of the mobile set in question during the warranty period rather retained the mobile set of the complainant at their service centre.  Now-a-days mobile set is a basic necessity of lifestyle and no one can remain without mobile set for a long period so version of the complainant that he purchased a new mobile set appears to be genuine and thus  after appreciating the facts of the case,  we  allow the complaint and directs the Ops No.2 & 3 to comply with the following directions within thirty days from the communication of this order:-

  1. To return to the complainant, the price of mobile set to the tune of Rs.1890/- alongwith simple interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of complaint till its realization.
  2. To pay a sum of Rs.2000/- as compensation on account of mental agony and harassment.
  3. Also to pay Rs.1000/- as litigation costs.

 

                        Further the award in question/directions issued above must be complied with by the OPs within the stipulated period failing which all the awarded amounts  shall further attract simple interest @ 12% per annum for the period of default. So, the complaint is allowed in above terms. Copies of this order be sent to the parties concerned, free of costs. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance. 

 

Announced:03.06.2015                                                                                         Sd/-      

                                                                                                                    (A.K. SARDANA)

                                                                                                                           PRESIDENT

 

 

                                                                                                                                  Sd/-

                                                                                                                        (S.C. SHARMA)                                                                                                                                                                                                       MEMBER

 

 

 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.