Prasenjit Rout S/O- Surendra Nath Routh filed a consumer case on 09 Feb 2015 against Ebay Indian Private Ltd in the Jharsuguda Consumer Court. The case no is CC/72/2014 and the judgment uploaded on 26 Dec 2017.
CONSUMER COMPLAINT CASE NO. 72 OF 2014
Prasenjit Rout (26 Yrs),
S/O: Surendra Nath Rout,
RO: Flat No. N F- 307, Vedanta Township, Bhurkamunda,
PO: Sripura, PS: Badmal,
Dist: Jharsuguda, Odisha…………………….…………….…………Complainant.
Versus
14th Floor, North Block R-Tech Park,
Goregaon (East), Mumbai-400 063
Maharastra, India.
No.28/7, Vasantham Garden,
MKB Nagar, Vyasarpadi
Channai- 600 039, Tamilnadu.……………..…..….…..….…...Opp. Parties.
Counsel for the Parties:-
For the Complainant Self
For the Opp. Party Ex-Parte.
Date of Order: 09.02.2015
Present
1. Shri S.L.Behera, President.
2. Shri S.K. Ojha, Sr. Member.
Shri S.K. Ojha, Sr. Member : - The brief facts of the complainant’s case is that the complainant has purchased one mobile hand set of having model Auxus Note 5.5 OCTA Core Smartphone finger print from the O.P.No.1 through on-line by paying Rs.13,990/- only and received the same on dtd. 12.09.2014. Soon after receiving the mobile he found verious defects in the said mobile such as defect in camera, battery etc. The complainant intimated the O.P No.1 about the said defects and requested to exchange his said mobile hand set or refund the cost price as it was under warranty period but the O.P.No.1 did not take any heed, hence this case.
On receiving notice, the O.P.No.1 did not respond and set ex-parte ultimately while the notice of O.P.No.2 returned back as addressee not found.
Heard from the complainant along with the documents filed. The complainant has placed an order to purchase one smartphone having model Auxus Note 5.5 OCTA Core Smartphone Finger Print Sensor before the O.P.No.2, on the website of O.P.No.1 where one Paisay Pay ID bearing No. 37265698724 has been created where the complainant has paid Rs.13,990/- only accordingly. After receiving the said smartphone, the complainant found defects of camera, defective battery etc. The complainant tried to contract the O.Ps though phone calls several times regarding exchange of the smartphone or refunding the cost price of the said smartphone, but neither of the O.Ps. responded on him.
Non responding regarding any defects on the product by any seller or trader after the product being sold to any consumer arrows towards clear deficiency in service on their part, which exactly happened in this case.
Hence, we are in considered opinion to allow the complaint case with directions to the O.P.No.1 to give one new defect free smartphone of having same brand and having same model or refund Rs.13,990/- ( Rupees thirteen thousand nine hundred ninety ) only along with pay a sum of Rs.4,000/- ( Rupees four thousand) only towards mental agony ,harassment and cost of this case, within 45 (forty-five) days from the date of receipt of this order, failing which the O.P.No.1 shall be liable for interest on the above mentioned awarded amounts till realization.
Accordingly the case is disposed of.
Order pronounced in the open court today the 09th day of February’ 2015 and copy of this order shall be supplied to the parties as per rule.
I Agree.
S. L. Behera, President S.K.Ojha, Sr.Member
Dictated and corrected by me
S.K.Ojha, Sr.Member
Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes
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.