BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, AMRITSAR.

Consumer Complaint No. 367 of 2015

Date of Institution: 05-06-2015

Date of Decision: 04-09-2015  

Jagwant Singh son of Ajit Singh resident of Main Bazar, Ajnala, District Amritsar.

Complainant

Versus

1. Golden Mobile Communication, Hall Bazar, Amritsar through is proprietor/ partner/ Manager/ Authorised Signatory.
2. Perfect Mobile Repair Center, Shop No. 19-20, Simran Plaza, Queens Road, Amritsar (Authorized Service Centre for Intex Mobiles).
3. Intex Technologies (India) Limited, D-18/2, Okhla Industrial Area, Phase-II, New Delhi-110020 through its Authorized Signatory/ Director/ Manager.

Opposite Parties

Complaint under section 11 and 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.

Present: For the Complainant: Sh.H.S.Grover, Advocate.

              For the Opposite Parties: Exparte

Quorum:

Sh.Bhupinder Singh, President

Ms.Kulwant Kaur Bajwa, Member      

Mr.Anoop Sharma, Member

Order dictated by:

Sh.Bhupinder Singh, President.

1. Present complaint has been filed by Sh.Jagwant Singh under the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act alleging therein that he purchased one Mobile set make Intex,  Model Intex Aqua Power HD, vide invoice No. 5798 dated 8.2.2015 for a sum of Rs.9,600/-  from Opposite Party No.1 manufactured by Opposite Party No.3. Complainant alleges that Mobile Set in question worked only for two months and thereafter it started developing one defect after another. The Mobile Set started going off automatically and whenever tried to make it on, the Mobile Set was not powering on. The complainant reported the matter to Opposite Party No.1 who forwarded the complainant to Opposite Party No.2 i.e. the authorised service centre of  Opposite Party No.3. Complainant immediately on 7.4.2015 approached Opposite Party No.2 who received the Mobile Set in question against job sheet No. 504075929006T001 dated 7.4.2015 for repair of the said Mobile Set. Said Mobile Set remained with Opposite Party No.2 for some days and the complainant made several visits personally for getting back the said Mobile Set, but he was not given back the Mobile Set on one pretext or the other and with great efforts the complainant got back the Mobile Set in question. After getting the Mobile Set from Opposite Party No.2, when started using it, he was shocked to know that the Mobile Set has developed another new problem in touching its all menus/ functions and it was  not functioning properly. Again the complainant as per the advise of the Opposite Party No.1 approached Opposite Party No.2 who again received the said Mobile Set from the complainant against job sheet No. 504215929002T001 dated 21.4.2015 for its repair. Again the complainant visited the Opposite Party No.2 for getting back the said Mobile Set, but he was not given the delivery of the Mobile Set on the ground that the same has not been repaired  and he was subsequently provided with the set after number of days. Again when the complainant tried to use the Mobile Set, again the complainant was shocked to know that the Mobile Set has developed number of other major problems, like audio/ video, camera were not working, speaker related problem was there. The complainant again approached Opposite Party No.2 at the instance of Opposite Party No.1 and again the Opposite Party No.2 received the Mobile Set for repair against job sheet No. 505215929003T001 dated 21.5.2015, but in vain. Since 22.5.2015 the complainant made so many visits to Opposite Party No.2 for getting back the said Mobile Set, but the Opposite Party No.2 is not giving back the Mobile Set on the ground that the same has not been repaired and since 21.5.2015 the Mobile Set is lying with Opposite Party No.2.   Alleging the same to be deficiency in service, complaint was filed seeking directions to the Opposite Parties to replace the Mobile Set with new one  of the same make and model or to refund the whole sale price of the said Mobile Set alongwith interest thereon. Compensation and litigation expenses were also demanded.
2. On notice, none appeared on behalf of Opposite Parties No.1 to 3, so Opposite Parties  No. 1 to 3 were  proceeded against exparte vide order dated 27.7.2015 of this Forum.
3. Complainant tendered into evidence his  affidavits Ex.C-1 and Ex.C2, copy of bill Ex.C3, copies of service requests Ex.C4 to Ex.C6 and closed the evidence on behalf of the complainant.
4. We have carefully gone through the pleadings of the complainant; arguments advanced by the ld.counsel for the complainant and have appreciated the evidence produced on record by the complainant with the valuable assistance of the ld.counsel for the complainant.
5. From the version of the complainant and evidence produced on record by the complainant, it stands fully proved on record that the complainant purchased one Mobile set make Intex,  Model Intex Aqua Power HD, vide invoice No. 5798 dated 8.2.2015 (Ex.C3) for a sum of Rs.9,600/-  from Opposite Party No.1. Said mobile set started giving problem of ‘automatic going off’ after two months from its purchase. The complainant  approached Opposite Party No. 2 authorised service centre on 7.4.2015  and handed over the mobile set in question to Opposite Party No. 2   vide job  sheet No. 504075929006T001 dated 7.4.2015 Ex.C4. Opposite Party No. 2   repaired the mobile set in question and handed over the same to the complainant, but when the complainant started using the mobile set, he found that Mobile Set has developed another new problem of touch function and again the complainant approached Opposite Party No. 2   and handed over the mobile set to Opposite Party No. 2   vide job sheet No. 504215929002T001 dated 21.4.2015 Ex.C5 for its repair and the Opposite Party No. 2 handed over the mobile set in question to the complainant after so many days, but when the complainant again tried to use the mobile set, he came to know that the said mobile set had developed some other major problems like audio/ video not play, camera not working as well as speaker related problem. Again the complainant handed over the mobile set to Opposite Party No.2 vide job sheet No. 505215929003T001 dated 21.5.2015 (Ex.C6) and this time the Opposite Party No. 2  failed to rectify the problem in the mobile set in question.  Since 21.5.2015, the mobile set in question has been lying with Opposite Party No. 2  and they could not repair the same nor handed over the same to the complainant. Ld.counsel for the complainant submitted that all this shows that the mobile set in question of the complainant is not repairable. Opposite Party No. 2   has also not replaced the mobile set with new one. Ld.counsel for the complainant, therefore, submitted that all this amounts to deficiency of service on the part of the Opposite Parties.
6. The complainant in order to prove the entire version has relied upon his duly sworn affidavits Ex.C1 and Ex.C2, invoice Ex.C3 and job sheets Ex.C4 to Ex.C6.  The evidence produced on record by the complainant remained unrebutted and unchallenged  as none appeared on behalf of the Opposite Parties to contest the case of the complainant nor any person from the Opposite Parties dared to file any affidavit to rebut the case of the complainant. The Opposite Parties were so negligent and acted so arbitrarily that instead of submitting any record or evidence oral or documentary, preferred to become exparte. From the entire above discussion, it stands fully proved on record  that since 21.5.2015, the mobile set of the complainant has been lying  with Opposite Party No. 2   and they have failed to  repair the same. All this fully proves that the mobile set of the complainant is not repairable. Therefore, the Opposite Parties No. 2 & 3 are  liable to replace the mobile set of the complainant with new one or to refund the price of the mobile set in question.
7. Resultantly, we allow the complaint exparte with costs and the Opposite Parties No.2 & 3 are directed to replace the mobile set of the complainant with new one of same make and model or to refund the price of the mobile set i.e. Rs. 9,600/- to the complainant, within one month  from the date of  receipt of copy of this order, failing which the Opposite Parties No.2 & 3 shall be liable to pay the interest  @ 9% per annum on the aforesaid amount of Rs.9,600/- from the date of filing the complaint till the payment is made to the complainant. The Opposite Parties No. 2 and 3 are also directed to pay Rs.1,000/- as costs of litigation to the complainant. Copies of the orders be furnished to the parties free of costs. File is ordered to be consigned to the record room. Case could not be disposed of within the stipulated period due to heavy pendency of the cases in this Forum.

Dated: 04-09-2015.                                          (Bhupinder Singh)                                                                                                President

hrg                                                (Anoop Sharma)     (Kulwant Kaur Bajwa)   

              Member                         Member