Date of Filing:18.01.2008 Date of Order: 25.03.2008 BEFORE THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM SESHADRIPURAM BANGALORE-20 Dated: 25TH DAY OF MARCH 2008 PRESENT Sri. S.S. NAGARALE, B.A, LL.B. (SPL.), President. Smt. D. LEELAVATHI, M.A.LL.B, Member. Sri. BALAKRISHNA. V. MASALI, B.A, LL.B. (SPL.), Member. COMPLAINT NO: 179 OF 2008 T. Prakash, No.81, New Thippasandra, II Main Road, HAL III Stage, Bangalore-560 075. Complainant V/S Hotspots Retails Pvt. Ltd., 97/1 & 97/3, M.G. Road, Bangalore-560 001. Opposite Party ORDER By the President Sri. S.S. Nagarale This is a complaint filed by the complainant for replacement of defective mobile handset. The case of the complainant is that, he has purchased new Samsung U-600 model mobile handset from the opposite party for Rs.12,300/- on 2/1/2008. The mobile sold to him is a defective and the same is not in a good working condition. He approached the company for replacement of the defective set. He handed over the same to the service center on 16/1/2008. He took deliver and used the same. The condition was not improved. Again he went to service center and handed over the set to service center and took receipt on 17/1/2008. He requested the company to give new set or return back the money since the set was of defective nature, but the opposite party refused to return back the money or exchange the set. Hence, the complaint. 2. Notice was issued to opposite party. Notice was served. In spite of service of notice, the opposite party has not appeared. Therefore, the opposite party has placed exparte. 3. The complainant has filed affidavit and documents. Heard the arguments of complainant. 4. The points for consideration are:- 1. Whether there was any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party? 2. Whether the opposite party can be directed to replace the mobile set? REASONS 5. Perused the affidavit and documents. The case made out by the complainant has gone unchallenged. The complainant has stated in his affidavit that, the mobile set purchased by him is defective one and it is not working properly. He handed over the same to the authorized service center of Samsung India Electronics Ltd.,. Even then the defect is not removed. Thereafter, again for the second time he handed over the set to the service center. The complainant requested for replacement of set or refund the money. The opposite party has not appeared and contested the matter. Whatever the allegations made by complainant in his affidavit shall have to be accepted. The Samsung company being a very repudiated and big company should see that no defective handset are being sold to the customers. Customers are the masters, it is the duty of the opposite party to satisfy the customers. Consumer Protection Act is a social legislation enacted to safeguard the better interest of the consumers. The producer of goods cannot escape the liability by remaining exparte. The complainant sought replacement of mobile handset which would be free of any defect or refund the amount paid by him. The prayer of the complainant is quite just and fair it has to be accepted. The opposite party can be directed to replace the mobile handset of the same model which would be without any defect. In the result, I proceed to pass the following:- ORDER 6. The complaint is allowed. The opposite party is directed to replace with new defect free Samsung U-600 model mobile to the complainant or the opposite party has to refund the amount of Rs.12,300/-, the price of the mobile handset to the complainant. The complainant is entitled to Rs. 1,000/- towards the costs of the present proceedings. The opposite party has to comply the order within 15 days from the date of this order. 7. Send the copy of this Order to both the parties free of costs immediately. 8. Pronounced in the Open Forum on this 25TH DAY OF MARCH 2008. Order accordingly, PRESIDENT We concur the above findings. MEMBER MEMBER
Consumer Court Lawyer
Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.
