Haryana

Kurukshetra

187/2017

Renu Jain - Complainant(s)

Versus

HTC Mobile - Opp.Party(s)

Pardeep Hariat

28 Feb 2018

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPTUES REDRESSAL FORUM, KURUKSHETRA.

                                                     Complaint Case No.187 of 2017.

                                                     Date of institution: 11.09.2017.

                                                     Date of decision: 28.02.2018.

Renu jain wife of Sh. Pawan Jain, age 40 years, resident of House No.473, Part 2 HUDA, Shahbad, Tehsil Shahbad, District Kurukshetra.

                                                                        …Complainant.

                        Versus

1. Shree Neelkanth Mobiles, Ladwa Road, near Bank of Baroda, Shahbad, District Kurukshetra through its proprietor.
2. HCL Karnal, Shop No.410, Ist floor, Mugal Canal Market, Karnal through its Incharge/Manager.
3. HTC India Private Ltd., G-4, Bptp Park, Avenue, Sector-30, Gurgaon through its MD/Director.

….Respondents.

BEFORE     SH. G.C.Garg, President.

                Dr. Jawahar Lal Gupta, Member.   

Present:     Sh. Pardeep Harit, Advocate, for complainant.   

                Ops exparte.

               

ORDER

                This is a complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 moved by complainant Renu Jain against Shree Neelkanth Mobiles & others, the opposite parties.

2.            It is stated in the complaint that complainant purchased a mobile set make HTC Model EGS bearing IMEI No.359479061100403 and 3594790611180405 for a sum of Rs.16,000/- from the Op No.1 vide bill No.1865 dt. 20.10.2016.  It is alleged that the said mobile set was defective from the very beginning with the problems hanging and stops working again and again during phone calls, its speed was also very slow and power and charging was also defective.  It is further alleged that the complainant after one week of its purchase, contacted to Op No.2, the authorized service centre of HTC mobile but he did not remove the problem of mobile set in question.  It is further alleged that the complainant also approached the Op No.1 regarding the defective mobile set but the Op No.1 also did not repair the mobile set.  It is further alleged that lastly on 11.08.2017, the complainant deposited the mobile set in question with the Op No.2 but the Op No.2 did not redress the grievances of complainant.  So, it is a clear cut case of deficiency in service on the part of Ops and prayed for acceptance of complaint with the direction to return the payment of Rs.16,000/- alongwith interest and further to pay Rs.10,000/- as compensation for harassment and mental agony as well as Rs.5,000/- as litigation charges.      

2.            Upon notice, the Ops No.2 & 3 did not appear and opted to proceed against exparte vide order dt. 30.10.2016, whereas Op No.1 initially appeared but did not appear on 04.12.2017, so, the Op No.1 was also proceeded against exparte vide order dt. 04.12.2017.

3.             Both the parties did not led any evidence to prove their version.

4.             We have heard the ld. Counsel for the complainant and perused the record carefully and minutely.

5.             From the cash memo, it is made out that the Unit in question was purchased on 20.10.2016 for the sale consideration of Rs.16,000/-. From the perusal of Job Sheet, it is clear that the unit became defective on 11.08.2017 i.e. within the warranty/guarantee period. In these circumstances, the complainant is entitled to get it replaced from Op No.3, who is manufacture of the unit in question.

6.            In view of our above said discussion, the complaint of the complainant is allowed and we direct the OP No.3 to replace the hand set of the complainant with new one of the same model.  The complainant is directed to deposit the old hand set along with bill and accessories with the service center of the company.  The order; be complied within a period of 60 days, failing which, penal action under Section 27 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 would be initiated against the opposite party No.3.  File be consigned to record after due compliance.  Copy of this order be communicated to the parties.  

Announced in open court:

Dt: 28.02.2018.

                                                                        (G.C.Garg)

                                                                        President.

 

 

(Dr. Jawahar Lal Gupta)            

                                        Member