Punjab

Moga

CC/15/90

Harnek Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

HTC India Private Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

In person

11 Jan 2016

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, MOGA.

 

                                      C.C. No. 90 of 2015

                                                                Instituted On: 17.11.2015

                                                  Decided On: 11.01.2016

 

Harnek Singh s/o Sunder Singh, resident of Ward No.1, Sant Nagar, Moga, Tehsil Moga, District Moga.

Complainant 

Versus

 

1. HTC India Private Ltd. Corporate Officee, G-4 BPtP Park Avenue, Gurgaon, Sector-30, Near N.G.8, Gurgaon-122-2, Ph.No.91-244129800, 18002663566.

2. Mahindra Mobile World, Near Jammu & Kashmir Bank, Court Road, Moga, through its Owner.

 

Opposite Parties

 

 

Complaint under section 12 of the

Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

 

 

 

Coram:      Sh.S.S.Panesar, President

                   Smt.Bhupinder Kaur, Member

Present:    Sh.Harnek Singh complainant in person.

                  Opposite parties nos.1 & 2 exparte.

 

ORDER

(S.S.Panesar, President)

                  Complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Act’) against HTC India Private Ltd. Corporate Officee, G-4 BPtP Park Avenue, Gurgaon, Sector-30, Near N.G.8, Gurgaon and others (herein-after referred to as opposite parties)- directing them to pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation on account of deficiency in service.

2.                Briefly stated the facts of the complaint are that on 13.08.2015 the complainant has purchased one mobile hand set HTC Explarer A 310, from opposite party no.2, who stated the price of the mobile hand set in question as Rs.5000/- and assured the complainant that 8GB Card will be provided to him. However, the mobile hand set, which was shown to the complainant, was not packed. Rather mobile hand set bearing IMEI no.35795304933013 was packed alongwith 2GB card. The said mobile hand set was defective. The complainant asked the opposite party no.2 to deduct the amount from his credit card, but it deducted an amount of Rs.5600/- from his credit card, however, the receipt which was provided to the complainant was for Rs.5500/- only. Whereas the deal was finalized for Rs.5000/-. Due to unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite parties, complainant had to suffer financial loss. The complainant requested the opposite parties for refund of the alleged illegal deduction, but the opposite parties did not bother to listen to the complainant. Hence this complaint.

3.                Upon notice, none has appeared on behalf of opposite party nos.1 & 2, despite due services. As such, opposite party nos.1 & 2 were ordered to be proceeded against exparte.

4.                In his evidence, the complainant Harnek Singh appeared in witness box as his own witness and filed his duly sworn affidavit Ex.C-1 in support of his allegations made in the complaint. The complainant also produced on record photocopies of the documents Ex.C-2 to Ex.C-3 and closed his evidence.

5.               We have heard the complainant in person and have also carefully gone through the record placed on file.

6.                The evidence adduced by the complainant has gone un-rebutted on record, as opposite parties did not opt to appear and contest the complaint, despite due services. It is the case of the complainant that on 13.08.2015, he has purchased a mobile HTC Explarer  310 E from opposite party no.2, who intimated the complainant that the value of HTC Elplarer 310E was Rs.5000/- and a deal for providing 8GB Card was also settled. But, however, mobile hand set, which was shown to the complainant, was not packed. Rather mobile hand set bearing IMEI no.35795304933013 was packed having 2GB Card only. The complainant asked opposite party no.2 to deduct the price of the mobile from his credit card, however, a sum of Rs.5600/- was deducted from his credit card. But, receipt issued to the complainant was for an amount of Rs.5500/- only. Whereas, actual price settled interse parties was to the tune of Rs.5000/- only. Complainant Harnek Singh made into the witness box as his own witness and furnished his sworn affidavit Ex.C-1 in support of the allegations made in the complaint. He has also produced receipt dated 13.08.2015 Ex.C2 issued by HDFC Bank shows that a deduction of Rs.5600/- was made from the credit card of the complainant. Whereas the bill Ex.C3 dated 13.08.2015 quoted the price to be Rs.5500/-. Extra amount to the tune of Rs.600/- charged by the opposite parties amounted to unfair trade practice. As such, the complainant is entitled to refund of Rs.600/-. Besides that the complainant is also entitled to receive Rs.3000/-(Three thousand only) as compensation for mental agony and physical pain. Opposite parties are directed to comply with the order within a period of 30 days of the receipt of the copy of the order, failing which, the complainant shall be at liberty to approach this Forum, for getting the order complied with and in that eventuality, the complainant shall also be entitled to receive the awarded amount of Rs.3600/- with interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of filing of the complaint until realization. The complaint stands allowed exparte accordingly. Copies of the order be sent to the parties free of cost immediately and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room.

 

 

                              (Bhupinder Kaur)                    (S.S. Panesar)

                               Member                                      President

 

Announced in Open Forum.

Dated:11.01.2016.