BEFORE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SIRSA.
Complaint Case no. 343 of 2023
Date of Institution: 04.09.2023
Date of Decision: 16.12.2024
Om Parkash son of Sh. Malik Ditta, resident of village Mallekan, Tehsil and District Sirsa.
………Complainant.
Versus
1. Flipkart India Private Limited, registered address Vaishnavi Summit, Ground Floor, 7th Main, 80 Feet Road, 3rd Block, Koramangala Industrial Layout, Bangalore KA 560034 through its authorized person.
2. Realme Mobile Telecommunications (India) Private Limited registered address 3rd Floor, Tower B, Building Number 8, DLF Cyber City Gurugram Gurgaon HR 122002 through its authorized person.
3. Realme Authorized Service Center, F1- Behind LIC Building, Old Civil Hospital Complex, Near Luxmi Sweets Sirsa, Contact No. 9467437633 through its authorized person.
……… Opposite parties.
Complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
Before: SHRI PADAM SINGH THAKUR………………. PRESIDENT
SMT. SUKHDEEP KAUR……………………….. MEMBER
Present: Complainant in person.
Sh. H. R. Singla, Advocate for opposite party no.1.
Opposite parties no.2 and 3 already exparte.
ORDER
In brief the case of complainant is that on 01.06.2023 complainant had purchased one mobile of Realme GT2 (Paper Green 128 GB) through opposite party no.1 for his minor son Karan Kamboj aged 17 years for a sum of Rs.25,058/-. That when op no.1 delivered the said mobile to their home, there was hanging problem in the mobile and its screen used to stop due to which its screen/ touch was not working properly and it used to freeze as a result of which the mobile is switched off at its own within some time. It takes about 20-25 minutes to start again and they sent a request to op no.1 for replacement of the mobile but op no.1 rejected the said request and through a reply they asked them to get checked the mobile in the care center of the company. It is further averred that thereafter on 05.06.2023 complainant visited op no.3 i.e. care center of the company and op no.3 after updating software of the mobile stated that now it will work properly and now there is no problem in it but they again found that the problem was as it is in the mobile and same could not be made defect free by op no.3 despite the fact that op no.3 has kept the same for several times but no receipt etc. was ever issued to them. That complainant had purchased the mobile for online study of his son but as ops have supplied a defective mobile to them, therefore they have caused financial loss and unnecessary harassment to them. Hence, this complaint.
2. Notice of the complaint was issued to the ops. Op no.1 appeared through counsel and sought various adjournments for filing written statement including last opportunity but did not file any written statement and as such defence of op no.1 was struck of.
3. Notices issued to ops no.2 and 3 received back with the report of refusal and as none appeared on behalf of ops no.2 and 3, therefore, they were proceeded against exparte.
4. The complainant in evidence has tendered his affidavit Ex. CW1/A and documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C3.
5. We have heard complainant as well as learned counsel for op no.1 and have gone through the case file.
6. From the invoice Ex.C1, it is evident that on 01.06.2023 complainant had placed an order to the op no.1 for purchase of mobile in question and said mobile manufactured by op no.2 was delivered to the complainant on the same date and an amount of Rs.25,058/- was charged from the complainant in this regard. The complainant alleges inherent and severe defects in the mobile in question right from very beginning of its delivery/ purchase. The pleadings as well as evidence led by complainant goes as unchallenged and unrebutted as op no.1 despite appearance did not file any written version and ops no.2 and 3 despite notices opted to be proceeded against exparte. So, it is proved on record that mobile was having defects just after its delivery i.e. within warranty period but ops have failed to redress the grievances of complainant despite his several requests and visits to them and have caused unnecessary harassment and deficiency in service towards the complainant and ultimately complainant has to file the present complaint on 04.09.2023 i.e. just within three months of purchase of mobile. The complainant had purchased the mobile in question for online study of his minor son but could not use the same despite spending huge amount of Rs.25,058/- for purchase of mobile in question and as such complainant is entitled to refund of the said amount from the ops.
7. In view of our above discussion, we allow the present complaint and direct the opposite parties specially ops no.1 and 2 i.e. supplier and manufacturer to make refund of the amount of Rs.25,058/- i.e. price of the mobile in question to the complainant alongwith interest at the rate of @6% per annum from the date of filing of present complaint i.e. 04.09.2023 till actual realization within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. We also direct the ops no.1 and 2 to further pay a sum of Rs.5000/- as composite compensation for harassment and litigation expenses to the complainant within above said stipulated period. A copy of this order be supplied to the parties as per rules. File be consigned to the record room.
Announced: Member President,
Dated: 16.12.2024. District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Sirsa.
