Before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Rohtak.
Complaint No. : 403.
Instituted on : 04.09.2018.
Decided on : 01.10.2019.
Jaiveer age 34 years s/o Sh. Rambhaj R/o VPO Kiloi, Distt. Rohtak.
………..Complainant.
Vs.
- Health & Happiness Pvt. Ltd. H.No.85, GF, Ghora Mohalla, Opp. Primary School Aya Nagar, New Delhi-110047, through its Manager.
- The Manager, The Lenovo/Moto Service Centre, SCF-42, HUDA Complex, Rohtak.
- Motorola India, Corp./Head Office at Motorola Excellence Centre, 415/2, Mehrauli-Gurgaon Road, Sector-14, Gurugram-122001.
……….Opposite parties.
COMPLAINT U/S 12 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,1986.
BEFORE: DR. RENU CHAUDHARY, MEMBER.
MS. TRIPTI PANNU, MEMBER.
Present: Sh.Naresh Kumar, Advocate for the complainant.
Sh. G.K.Lalit, Advocate for opposite party No.2 & 3.
Opposite party No.1 exparte.
ORDER
DR. RENU CHAUDHARY, MEMBER:
1. The present complaint has been filed by the complainant with the averments that he had purchased a mobile phone Moto E-4 Plus from his friend Vijender, who had purchased the same through respondent no.1 for Rs.9900/- vide Invoice no.3FAAAHZ 18000 82808 on 16.07.2017 with one year warranty and the said mobile was manufactured by respondent by 3. That on the month of June 2018, the mobile was not functioning properly and was out of order. That complainant contacted the opposite party No.2 for repair of alleged mobile and mobile set was inspected vide job sheet dated 06.07.2018 and it was told that the mobile was out of warranty and cost of repair shall be Rs.1500/-, whereas the said mobile was within warranty period. That in compelling circumstances, the complainant had to deposit the mobile set with the respondent no.2. But when the complainant visited the respondent no.2 on 16.07.2018, he was told that the estimated cost of repair was Rs.7555/-. That complainant requested the opposite party to repair the mobile free of cost as the defect appeared within warranty period but any heed was not paid to his requests. That the act of opposite parties of selling a defective mobile is illegal and there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties. As such, it is prayed that opposite parties may kindly be directed to replace the mobile set with new one or to pay Rs.9900/- towards the cost of mobile in question alongwith Rs.50,000/- as compensation and Rs.20000/- as litigation expenses to the complainant as explained in relief clause.
2. After registration of complaint, notice was issued to the opposite parties, who appeared and filed their written reply. Opposite party No. 2 & 3 in their reply has submitted that the mobile set had no major problems. The complainant did not keep the mobile phone with proper care. Still the mobile set of the complainant was repaired but he only insisted for replacement of the mobile which is not possible without any reason or defect. That when the complainant again came with the mobile set, it was not under warranty and the cost of repairs was told by the respondent no.2. That there is no deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties and dismissal of complaint has been sought. Opposite party no.1 did not appear and was proceeded against exparte vide order dated 08.03.2019 of this Forum.
3. Learned counsel for the complainant in his evidence tendered affidavit Ex.CW1/A, documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C4 and has closed his evidence on dated 30.04.2019. On the other hand, ld. Counsel for the opposite parties No. 2 & 3 failed to file any evidence despite availing sufficient opportunities and as such, evidence of opposite party No.2 & 3 was closed by the order dated 11.09.2019 of this Forum.
4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through material aspects of the case very carefully.
5. After going through the file and hearing the parties it is observed that as per bill Ex.C1, the friend of the complainant namely Vijender s/o Sh. Ram Kishan had purchased the mobile set on 16.07.2017 for Rs.9999/-, from which the complainant had purchased the same and undertaking to this effect has been placed on record as Ex.C2. For the first time, the defect in the mobile set appeared on 06.07.2018 i.e. within warranty period and complainant handed over his mobile set to opposite party No.2 and opposite party issued job sheet Ex.C3. However, the job sheet is not properly visible but it is noticed that the name of the user is Jaiveer Kumar and the carry in time is 06.07.2018 and the estimated cost in the job sheet is mentioned as Rs.1500/-. The second job sheet issued by the opposite party is Ex.C4 dated 16.07.2018, as per which, the warranty period had expired and they demanded Rs.7550/- for change of mother board being out of warranty. But this fact cannot be denied that the defect appeared within warranty period i.e. on 06.07.2018 and the opposite parties were liable to remove the defect free of cost within warranty period. Hence there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties. As such complainant is entitled for the refund of price of mobile set after deduction of 50% depreciation on it as the complainant has used the mobile phone uninterruptedly for 11 months.
6. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, complaint is allowed and we hereby direct the opposite party No.3 being manufacturer to refund the price of mobile set after deduction of 50% depreciation i.e. to pay Rs.5000/-(Rupees five thousand only) alongwith interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of filing the present complaint i.e. 04.09.2018 till its realization and shall also to pay a sum of Rs.1000/-(Rupees one thousand only) as compensation and Rs.1000/-(Rupees one thousand only) as litigation expenses to the complainant within one month from the date of decision. However, complainant is directed to hand over the mobile in question to the opposite parties at the time of receiving of awarded amount, if the same is in his possession.
7. Copy of this of and the order be supplied to both the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.
Announced in open court:
01.10.2019.
…...........................................
Renu Chaudhary, Member.
..........................................
Tripti Pannu, Member.
