Punjab

Sangrur

CC/270/2018

Rakesh Kalra - Complainant(s)

Versus

Gurjeet Telecom - Opp.Party(s)

Sh.Ashish Kumar Grover

28 Jan 2019

ORDER

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SANGRUR

                             

                                                                    Complaint no. 270                                                                                                  

                                                                    Instituted on:  12.06.2018                                                                                     

                                                                    Decided on:    28.01.2019

 

Rakesh Kalra son of Sh. Parabh Dayal Kalra resident of Guru Nanakpura Mohalla, Sunami Gate, Sangrur.

                                       

                                                …. Complainant   

                                Versus

 

1.    Gurjeet Telecom Near Car Stand Anaj Mandi, Dirba District Sangrur through its Proprietor/ Partner.

 

2.    OPPO Mobile India, 2nd Floor, Block 1, Vatika Business Park, Sohna Road, Sector 49, Gurgaon, Haryana through its Managing Director.

                                                  ….Opposite parties.

 

 

FOR THE COMPLAINANT  :         Shri Ashish Grover, Advocate                        

 

FOR THE OPP. PARTIES     :   Exparte

 

Quorum

                            

Vinod Kumar Gulati, Presiding Member

Manisha, Member

 

ORDER:   

 

                 Vinod Kumar Gulati, Presiding Member

 

1.             Rakesh Kalra, complainant has preferred the present complaint against the opposite parties (referred to as OPs in short) on the ground that he purchased one mobile phone Oppo F1s Gold vide invoice number 61 dated 21.06.2017 for an amount of Rs.17500/- from the OP no.1 under one year warranty. From the very beginning, the mobile set is not  working properly and it gave  problem of hanging and it did not catch the network of the network provider. The battery backup of the said mobile set is very poor.  The complainant visited the OPs with this complaint then they started to make lame excuse that there may be more use of mobile set so why the battery discharged earlier and mobile hangs due to software and installation of games. In the month of May 2017, the mobile set started giving another problem of Display Flickering and Touch not working  properly for which he approached the OP no.1  who sent the set to care centre for repair and after two days  the OP no.1 returned the mobile set after rectifying all the problem but  the problem of display flickering and touch not working properly remains same. On 25.05.2018 complainant again approached the OP no.1 but he refused to entertain the complaint and he told that mobile set has manufacturing defect. The complainant demanded the job sheet but he refused to give the same. Thus, alleging deficiency in service on the part of OPs, the complainant has sought following reliefs:- 

 

1. OPs be directed to refund  the purchase amount of mobile set i.e. Rs.17,500/- alongwith interest @18% per annum from the date of purchase till realization,
2. OPs be directed to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs.25,000/- on account mental agony and harassment and Rs.11000/- as litigation expenses.

 

2.                  The OPs did not appear despite service  and as such they were proceeded exparte.

 

3.                  The complainant has tendered documents Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-5 and closed evidence.

 

4.               We have perused the entire documents placed on the file by the complainant and heard the arguments of the complainant. We find that that the complainant  purchased  one mobile phone Oppo F1s Gold vide invoice number 61 dated 21.06.2017 for an amount of Rs.17500/- from the OP no.1 under one year warranty which is evident from copy of retail invoice Ex.C-1. It has been stated by the complainant that from the very beginning, the mobile set is not working properly and it gave  problem of hanging and it did not catch the network of the network provider.  It has been further stated that the complainant visited the OPs with this complaint then they started to make lame excuse that there may be more use of mobile set so that the battery discharged earlier and mobile hangs due to software and installation of games. The complainant has stated that in the month of May 2017, the mobile set started giving another problem of Display Flickering and Touch not working properly for which he approached the OP no.1  who sent the set to care centre for repair and after two days  the OP no.1 returned the mobile set after rectifying all the problem but  the problem of display flickering and touch not working properly remains same. On 25.05.2018 complainant again approached the OP no.1 but he refused to entertain the complaint and he told that mobile set has manufacturing defect. The complainant demanded the job sheet but he refused to give the same. Thereafter the complainant again approached the OP no.1 and requested to replace the mobile set due to manufacturing defect but the OP no.1 flatly refused to replace the same.  In support of his case the complainant has produced on record expert report of Damanjit Singh  expert, Ex.C-4 who opined that he retained the mobile set for two days and used the same. The mobile was given the problem of Display Flickering and Touch not working properly. He got checked the said mobile phone and found that the mobile set has manufacturing defect and same problem is not curable one. The complainant has also produced on record an affidavit of Damanjit Singh which is Ex.C-5 on record. The OPs have not come forward to contest the case of the complainant rather they chosen to remain exparte. As such the evidence produced by the complainant has gone unrebutted on record.

 

5.               In view of the facts stated above, we allow the complaint and direct the OPs to replace the defective mobile set with a new one of same model. We further direct the OPs to pay to the complainant an amount of Rs.3000/- being compensation on account of mental agony and harassment and Rs.2000/- as litigation expenses.

 

6.               This order of ours shall be complied with within 45 days from the receipt of copy of the order. File be consigned to records in due course.  

 

                Announced.

                                        January 28, 2019

 

 

                             ( Manisha )                ( Vinod Kumar Gulati)      

                               Member                      Presiding Member