3. Op no.2 in its separate reply submitted that op no.2 is carrying on the business of sale of goods manufactured/ produced by other manufacturers. The op no.2 is not engaged in sale of any goods manufactured or produced by its own. The product sold by op no.2 carries manufacturer’s warranty. While denying the remaining contents of the complaint for want of knowledge, it is also submitted that complainant has failed to produce any job sheet in support of his contention that he ever visited to the authorized service centre for redressal of his grievance. It is not the case of selling defective product and the same is evident from the fact that complainant has used the product in issue for more than 10 months without any problem and 30 days replacement warranty provided by op no.2 also stands lapsed on or around 14.11.2015. The duty to remove the defect in the product is of ops no.3 and 4.
4. Opposite party no.3 in its written statement submitted that after validating with the authorized service centre there is no service call record against the IMEI number of the complainant. The complainant has never visited the authorized service centre for any kind of service. As per the Customer Relationship Management tool there is no service call/ request made by the complainant against his mobile. It is further submitted that each and every device goes through all the quality check process and no product is sent to the market without the QC approval. Remaining contents of complaint have also been denied.
5. Initially op no.4 appeared through counsel but did not file any written statement despite availing numerous opportunities including last opportunity and ultimately none appeared on behalf of op no.4 and therefore, op no.4 was proceeded against exparte.
6. The complainant produced his affidavit Ex.CW1/A and copy of retail invoice Ex.CW2. On the other hand, ops no.1 to 3 did not produce any evidence despite availing numerous opportunities including last opportunities and ultimately on 16.10.2017 in the interest of justice one more opportunity was granted to the ops and the case was adjourned for 23.10.2017 for evidence of ops, if any with the direction that otherwise it would be deemed to have been closed and arguments shall be heard. However, on 23.10.2017 none appeared on behalf of ops no.1 to 3 and therefore, they were also proceeded against exparte.
7. We have heard learned counsel for complainant and have perused the case file carefully.
8. The perusal of the record reveal that case was fixed for evidence of the opposite parties on 23.10.2017 and it was the last opportunity but neither ops no.1 to 3 nor their counsel came present as a result of which they were proceeded against exparte.
9. The complainant in order to prove his case has furnished his affidavit Ex.CW1 and copy of retail invoice Ex.CW2. On the other hand, though ops no.1 to 3 filed their written statements but however, they did not lead any evidence in order to prove their defence plea. So, the evidence led by complainant goes as unchallenged and unrebutted. So it is proved on record that mobile of the complainant developed above said defects in the warranty period and has not been repaired by the ops.
10. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case, we allow the present complaint and direct the opposite parties to get the mobile of the complainant repaired through authorized service centre and to make it defect free after replacement of defective parts, if any free of costs within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. In case the mobile in question is not repairable, the ops will replace the mobile in question with a new one of same make and model within further period of 15 days and in case of non availability of the same make and model, the ops will refund the cost of the mobile in question to the complainant within further period of 15 days, failing which the complainant will be entitled to interest @9% per annum on the cost of the mobile in question i.e. Rs.6699/- from the date of order till actual payment. Besides above, we also direct the ops to pay a sum of Rs.1000/- as compensation to the complainant. All the ops are jointly and severally liable to comply with this order. The complainant will have to send the mobile in question to the authorized service centre alongwith its accessories etc. well in time. A copy of this order be supplied to the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room.
Announced in open Forum. President,
Dated:24.10.2017. Member Member District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Forum, Sirsa.
