Delhi

West Delhi

CC/15/417

JASPREET SINGH - Complainant(s)

Versus

ESTEEM TECHNOLOGIES - Opp.Party(s)

18 Oct 2016

ORDER

CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM (WEST)

GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI

150-151, Community Centre, C-Block, JanakPuri, New Delhi – 110058

 

                                                                                     Date of institution    :25.6.15

 

Complaint Case. No 417/15                                      Date of order:18.10.16              

 

In the matter  of

 

Jaspreet Singh,

3050/58, Ranjeet Nagaar,

New Delhi-08                                                                                             COMPLAINANT

VERSUS

Esteem Technologies,

104, 2^nd Floor,Westend Mall,

Janak Puri, District Center,

New Delhi-59.                                                                                            OPPOSITE PARTY-1

 

Apple India Pvt. Ltd.,

19^th Floor, Concorde  Tower-C,

UB City, No.24, Vittal Mallya Road,

Bangalore-560001                                                                                                OPPOSITE PARTY-2

ORDER

R.S. BAGRI, PRESIDENT

 

            Brief facts necessary for the disposal of the present complaint are that the complainant  purchased one mobile handset IPhone 4 8GB from Elegant Communication for sale consideration of Rs.21,700/- vide invoice No. 349R1 dated 26.5.14.  The mobile handset

2

developed some fault on 18.4.15. The complainant on 20.4.15 deposited the mobile handset within warranty with the IPhone Service Care vide job sheet No.12151.  The complainant on next day was given a new phone.  But after one day the same developed fault.     Therefore, on 23.4.15 he again deposited the mobile handset vide job sheet No.12236.  Again new mobile handset was given.  Which developed fault on 8.6.15. The same was deposited with authorised service center Opposite Party-1 on 10.6.15  vide job sheet No.13495.  On 22.6.15 again new mobile handset was given to the complainant.  But the same also developed fault.  Which was deposited vide job sheet No.13871 dated 24.6.15 with Opposite Party-1.  The complainant  pressed for IPhone 6Plus  against IPhone 4.  Which was declined by Opposite Party-1.  Hence the present complaint  for directions to Opposite Parties to refund cost of the mobile handset and in alternative to give IPhone 6plus alongwith compensation for mental pain, agony and harassment.

 

            Notice of the complaint was sent to Opposite Parties.  The Opposite Party-2 filed reply to the complaint asserting that  the complainant has used IPhone for eleven months and before end of warranty period  the complainant with ulterior motive alleged  faults in the IPhone in order to get it replaced with higher version.  They further asserted that the Opposite Parties have replaced the mobile handset with new mobile handset thrice as a good will gesture.  They further asserted that there is no cause of action against them and the complaint is false and frivolous and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

 

The complainant filed rejoinder to the reply of Opposite Party-2 reiterating the stand taken in the complaint and controverting the stand taken by Opposite Party-2.  He asserted that the Opposite Parties were unable to resolve his grievance, therefore, he has to visit them several times.  But despite imposing cost Opposite Party-1 failed to file reply and is proceeded exparte vide order dated 23.2.16. 

 

            When the parties were asked to lead evidence by way of affidavit, the complainant filed affidavit dated 1.4.16 and relied upon copy of invoice dated 26.5.14 and various job sheets dated 20.4.15, 23.4.15, 10.6.15 and 24.6.15.   He has once again narrated the facts of the complaint in his affidavit and once again prayed for  relief as sought in the complaint. 

 

 

3

            The Opposite Party-2 filed affidavit of Sh. Priyesh Povanna, reiterating the stand taken in the reply and denying the allegations of the complainant.  The Opposite Party-2 relied upon  copy of warranty terms and conditions.   

 

            From the perusal of the invoice dated 26.5.14 and job sheets dated 20.4.15,23.4.15, 10.6.15 and 24.6.15 it reveals that the complainant purchased mobile handset IPhone 4 8GB for sale consideration of Rs.21,700/-.  The handset was given for repairs to Opposite Party-1 within warranty on 20.4.15,23.4.15, 10.6.15 and 24.6.15.    But the same is not returned till today.  It is worthwhile to mention that when the matter was fixed for written arguments and final arguments the Opposite Party-2 also  failed to appear. Hence proceeded exparte vide order dated 6.6.16. 

 

            We have heard the complainant in person and gone through the material on record carefully and thoroughly.

 

            The complainant from invoice, job sheet has been able to show that he on 26.5.14 purchased one mobile handset IPhone 4 8GB for sale consideration of Rs.21,700/-.  The mobile handset was given for repairs to Opposite Party-1 on 20.4.15,23.4.15, 10.6.15 and 24.6.15 within warranty.   But the same is not returned till today.    Opposite Party-2 in the affidavit rebutted the allegations of the complainant but except affidavit there is nothing on record to prove that the mobile handset was repaired and complainant was informed to collect the same.  The Opposite Party-2 neither in the affidavit nor in the reply is  able to show that the mobile handset has no manufacturing defect.  However, there is sufficient material on record to show that the complainant approached the Opposite Parties several times for repair of his mobile handset.   The Opposite Parties have failed to prove that there is no unfair trade practice or deficiency in service  on their part.   From the documents it is ample clear that the mobile handset could not be repaired by the Opposite Parties and the same is not returned till today.   The complainant  has suffered loss of mobile handset and is also deprived of his valueable right to use mobile handset.   Therefore, there is negligence and deficiency in service on the part of Opposite Parties.  The Opposite Parties are liable to pay Rs.21,700/- cost of mobile handset and Rs.3,000/- compensation for mental pain, agony and harassment and litigation expenses.  

 

4

In light of above discussion and observations, the complaint succeeds and is hereby allowed.   The Opposite Parties 1 and 2 are directed to pay a sum of Rs.21,700/- cost of mobile handset with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing of the complaint till actual realization of the amount.   We also award compensation of Rs.3,000/- for mental pain, agony and harassment and litigation expenses.  

 

Order pronounced on   :18.10.2016

·        Compliance of the order be made within 30 days after receipt of the order.

·        Copy of order be sent to the concerned parties free of cost.

·        Thereafter, file be  consigned to record.

 

 

(PUNEET LAMBA)                          (URMILA GUPTA)              ( R.S.  BAGRI )

  MEMBER                                         MEMBER                            PRESIDENT