Order:- ( R.S. Dahiya, President)
1. Brief facts of the complaint are that the complainant purchased a mobile handset make GIONEE F103 alongwith one year warranty from the opposite party No. 2 for a sum of Rs. 10200/- vide bill No. 1550 dated 19.3.2016. On 6.9.2016 the complainant found some defects in the said mobile handset and the mobile phone was not working properly. The complainant informed the opposite party No. 1 Service Centre on 6.9.2016 regarding the defects of the mobile handset. Thereafter, the opposite party No. 1 Service Centre changed the Mother-Board of the mobile phone, but the mobile phone was not working properly and after that the complainant went to the another service centre of the opposite party No. 1 situated at Gurgaon (OP No. 3) for repairing of said mobile phone and the service centre repaired the mobile phone, but the mobile phone is not working properly. After visiting the service centre of opposite party No. 1 the complainant contacted the customer care centre of opposite party No. 1 at toll free No. 18002081166 and registered a complaint about the defects of the mobile phone. But the customer care centre of the opposite party No. 1 has not been given any satisfactory reply and they also told to the complainant that they cannot do anything in the matter. It is stated that the mobile phone is very costly and the opposite party No. 1 is selling the defective mobile phone to the customer and the opposite party No. 1 is cheating and frauding with the customers. Due to defective mobile phone, the complainant has suffered a great mental and physical problem. Hence, it is requested that the complaint of the complainant may be accepted and the opposite party be directed to change defective mobile phone with new one or to refund the amount of Rs. 10200/- along with interest thereon.
2. Notices were issued against all the opposite parties for 11.11.2016.
Notice issued against the opposite party No. 1 and 3 not received back either served or unserved. A statutory period of one month has been elapsed, but none has come present on behalf of opposite party No. 1 and 3. Hence, the opposite party No. 1 and 3 were proceeded against ex parte vide order dated 11.11.2016.
Notice issued against the opposite party No. 2 received back with the report of refusal. Hence, the opposite party No. 2 was also proceeded against ex parte vide order dated 11.11.2016.
3. The complainant in his evidence produced the bill of purchase of the mobile phone Ex. C1 from the opposite party No. 2 dated 19.3.2016 which is in the name of the complainant, no other documentary evidence regarding repair of the mobile phone for two times from the opposite party No. 3 has been produced. However, the complainant has given a sworn affidavit supporting his averments in the complaint. Thus, this Forum is inclined to accept the unrebbted sworn statement of the complainant. Having said so this Forum is of considered opinion that opposite party No. 1 and 2 were jointly and severally liable to address the grievances of the complainant which they fail to do. As such, this Forum directs the opposite party no. 1 and 2 jointly and severally either change the defective mobile phone with a new one of the same make or to refund Rs. 10200/- alongwith interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing of complaint till its realization to the complainant. Further, the opposite party No. 1 and 2 jointly and severally directed to pay Rs. 5000/- (five thousand rupees only) as litigation charges and compensation to the complainant within 30days from the receipts of order. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.
Announced on 26.4.2017
President
Member Member District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Forum/Nuh (Mewat)
