Delhi

East Delhi

CC/615/2015

AMIT - Complainant(s)

Versus

GAURAV - Opp.Party(s)

13 Jul 2017

ORDER

                 DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM, EAST, Govt of NCT Delhi

                  CONVENIENT SHOPPING CENTRE, 1^st FLOOR, SAINI ENCLAVE, DELHI 110092                                  

                                                                                                  Consumer complaint no.         615 /2015

                                                                                                  Date of Institution     -           18/08/2015

                                                                                                  Order Reserved on                13/07 /2017

                                                                                                  Date of Order         -             14/07 /2017  

                                                                                                        

In matter of

Mr. Amit Kumar Singh, adult   

R/o- D 46, Gali No. 8

Unche Par, Mandawali, Delhi 110093 …………………………….……..…………….Complainant

                                                                  

                                                                     Vs

1-Gaurav Kharbanda

D-30, 2^nd Floor, Dayanand Block,

Old Patparganj Road,

Nirwan Vihar,Delhi 110092

 

2- M/s Karbonn Mobile       

D 170, Okhala Industrial Area Phase I,

New Delhi 110020

 

3- M/s Karbonn Mobile  

39/13, 7^th Main Hall, 2^nd Stage, Appardy Pallaya

Indra Nagar, Bangaluru, 560038………….…………………….……………………………Opponents

 

 

Quorum  -      Sh Sukhdev Singh-     President

                         Dr P N Tiwari -            Member                                                                                                   

                         Mrs Harpreet Kaur-   Member

 

Order by Dr P N Tiwari, Member 

Brief Facts of the case                                   

Complainant, press reporter by profession, purchased a Karbonn mobile A-27+ on 26/03/2014 through  online vide EMEI 911304200914244 and 911304200914251, double SIM for Rs 5999-having one year standard warranty. Complainant used his mobile for 9 months and thereafter some problem occurred which were rectified on the same day. Thereafter, mobile got switched off on 17/12/2014, so was taken to the service centre on 18/12/2014 and was assured to get the mobile after 10 days, so was deposited after discussing the matter with customer care centre of OP. The mobile was returned after repair. Complainant stated that problem again occurred, so service centre gave him one alternate mobile for use. As it was not working properly, so he deposited again with the service center vide job sheet no KJASPDL108415K26781 dated 18/03/2015. But despite of number of visits, OP did not return mobile.

Complainant felt harassed by the services of OP, so purchased a new mobile for his use and filed this complaint claiming refund of the cost of his mobile a sum of Rs 5999/- besides compensation for harassment Rs 65000/- and loss of validity of his two SIM cards Rs 21,000/- with litigation charges Rs 5,000/-

Even after receiving of notices, OP did not submit written statement or put their appearance so their right to file written statement was closed. Complainant filed his evidence only on affidavit and affirmed that the facts and evidence submitted with his complaint were true and correct.

OP also submitted evidences on affidavit through Mr Kapil Kumar, AR of Jaina Marketing and Associates on behalf of OP2. OP affirmed that complainant had used his mobile defect free for 9 months and had developed some minor setting problems which were rectified free of cost as mobile was in warranty. It was stated complainant deposited his mobile on 18/04/2015 for no network problem vide job sheet no KJASPDL 108415K26781 for IMEI 1 -91304200685422 and IMEI 2 -91304200685430 which were not as per invoice details. There was no manufacturing defect and mobile was out of warranty at that time as per annexure submitted by complainant CW1/2. As service charges were to be paid by the complainant, so he did not come to collect the mobile yet. Hence, there was not deficiency in the service of OP and this complaint may be dismissed.  

Arguments were heard from both parties, file was perused and order was reserved.

We have gone through the facts and evidences of this case. Complainant had not submitted his rejoinder, but only submitted his evidences on affidavit. OP also had not submitted their written statement, but only submitted evidence on affidavit.

It was clear that complainant had used his mobile during warranty tenure without any problem as per evidence CW1/2, the mobile had net work problem which cannot be said to be due to manufacturing defect after one year. Complainant had purchased another mobile, meaning thereby it cannot be said that complainant had suffered business loss due to the said mobile. It is also clear that rectifying problems in post warranty period are subject to charges of services and parts if required to be replaced.

More so, said mobile had no problem in warranty period so refund of the cost of mobile was not possible, but as the said mobile was with service centre, the complainant is directed to collect the same after paying the cost of service charges and cost of parts if required to be replaced by OP within 30 days from the receiving of this order copy.           

There shall be no other award to order.

The copy of this order be sent to the parties as per rules and file be consigned to the Record Room.

Dr) P N Tiwari                                                                                                             Mrs - Harpreet Kaur                                                                                  

    Member                                                                                                                               Member                                                                                   

                                                 Shri Sukhdev Singh

                                                             President