BEFORE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SAHIBZADA AJIT SINGH NAGAR (MOHALI)
Consumer Complaint No.360 of 2015
Date of institution: 21.07.2015
Date of Decision: 05.01.2016
Money Kumar son of Ashok Kumar, resident of House No.313, Phase 3A, Mohali.
……..Complainant
Versus
I Bhejo India, 45 Oasis, Vakala Maszid, Santacruz East, Mumbai 400055
………. Opposite Party
Complaint under Section 12 of the
Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
CORAM
Mrs. Madhu. P. Singh, President.
Shri Amrinder Singh Sidhu, Member
Mrs. R.K. Aulakh, Member.
Present: Complainant in person.
Opposite Party ex-parte.
(Mrs. Madhu P. Singh, President)
ORDER
The complainant has filed the present complaint seeking following direction to the Opposite Party (for short ‘the OP’) to:
(a) replace the Apple I-5 (16BG Black Colour) Mobile set or to refund Rs.20,576/- i.e. the price of the set alongwith interest @ 18% per annum from the date of purchase i.e. 29.06.2015.
(b) pay him compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- for mental torture, harassment, agony and pain.
The complainant purchased Apple I-5 (16GB Black Colour) Mobile set vide order dated 29.06.2015 for Rs.20,576/-. The OP is manufacturer of the mobile set. At the time of purchase of the mobile, 90 days warranty was provided by the OP. It was also assured that if there is any permanent defect found in the set, then it would be replaced. After two days of its purchase, the mobile set went out of order as there was problem of display. The complainant sent e-mails many times to the OP but the OP did not send any reply. The complainant also contacted local service centre of the OP who informed the complainant that the mobile set is used and its expiry date was over. Again the complainant sent e-mail but the OP did not respond. The OP asked the complainant to ship back the mobile but as the complainant has not received any bill of the mobile, thus the complainant had not sent the mobile. With these allegations, the complainant has filed the present complaint.
2. Service to the OP was effected through e-mail on 18.09.2015 by the complainant as well as by this office but none appeared for the OP. Hence it was proceeded against exparte on 26.10.2015.
3. To succeed in the complaint, the complainant proved on record affidavit Ex.CW-1/1 and tendered in evidence documents Ex.C-1 to C-2.
4. We have heard the complainant and have also gone through pleadings and evidence of the complainant.
5. The complainant has purchased the mobile handset Apple I-5 16GB from the OP through online and made the payment of Rs.20,576/- against order No.45136299 dated 29.06.2015 . As per the complainant, he has received e-mail dated 30.06.2015 Ex.C-2 from the OP showing its concern for delay in delivery as the mobile hand set in question was to be imported from USA and finally the complainant received the handset on 06.07.2015. Upon receipt it was found not in a good condition and, therefore, the complainant immediately reported the matter to the OP vide e-mail dated 06.07.2015 showing the picture of the mobile hand set and demanded the refund the sale consideration paid to the OP. The OP has responded back to the complainant and asked the complainant to ship the product back to Mumbai in unopened and unused condition. The complainant has not shipped back the mobile hand set to the OP and rather raised another query demanding the bill of the purchased mobile hand set. The OP has not responded thereafter and, therefore, the complainant has not shipped back the defective handset to the OP which is still in the possession of the complainant. Therefore, the complainant has filed the present complaint.
6. The complainant has proved the payment of Rs.20,576/- in favour of the OP for purchase of handset vide Ex.C-1. Further the complainant has proved the delay in delivery of handset vide exchange of e-mails Ex.C-2 and C-3. The OP itself has admitted in its e-mail dated 06.07.2013 wherein it has admitted the complaint and desired the complainant to ship back the hand set in unused and unopened condition. Further the OP, upon receipt of notice from this Forum has sent e-mail dated 18.09.2015 where it has assured to look into for resolving the issue of the complainant. Such an e-mail though inadvertently has been left out in our Zimni order dated 26.10.2015. Once the OP is seized of the matter and grievance of the complainant remained unattended and un-resolved in the hands of the OP before filing of the present complaint and even during the pendency of the present complaint, the OP has thus indulged into unfair trade practice by not redressing the grievance of the complainant and rendering after sale service to the complainant. The act of the OP is thus an unfair trade practice and deficiency in service on its part.
7. The complaint is, therefore, allowed against the OP with the following directions:
(a) to refund to the complainant Rs.20,576/- (Rs. Twenty thousand five hundred seventy six only) with interest thereon @ 9% per annum from 29.06.2015 till actual refund.
(b) to pay to the complainant a lump sum compensation of Rs.10,000/- (Rs. Ten thousand only) on account of mental agony, harassment and costs of litigation.
Compliance of this order be made within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. Certified copies of the order be furnished to the parties forthwith free of cost and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room.
Pronounced.
January 05, 2016.
(Mrs. Madhu P. Singh)
President
(Amrinder Singh Sidhu)
Member
(Mrs. R.K. Aulakh)
Member
