Haryana

Charkhi Dadri

CC/124/2023

Sidharth - Complainant(s)

Versus

I-tech Sanaya Enterprises - Opp.Party(s)

Sh. Anand Godara

05 Aug 2024

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL

COMMISSION, CHARKHI DADRI. 

 

                                      Complaint No.      :  124 of 2023.                                                                 Date of Institution:  12.09.2023.

                                      Date of order:     :  05.08.2024

Sidharth aged 23 years son of Sh. Pawan Kumar, resident of Professor Colony, Charkhi Dadri, Tehsil & District Charkhi Dadri

 

..Complainant.

                                                  VERSUS

 

1. I-tech Sanaya Enterprises, Shop No.11, Sheetal     Life Style Mall, Opp.      D-Park, Model Town, Rohtak-124001 through its proprietor Sumit.

2.      Prince Minocha son of Sh. Baljeet Singh, resident of Bahadurgarh, Tehsil   Bahadurgarh, Distt. Jhajjar.

 

..Opposite parties.

 

COMPLAINT UNDER THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,

 

Before-     Sh. Manjit Singh  Naryal, President.

Sh. Dharam Pal Rauhilla, Member.

 

Argued by:  Shri Anand Godara, Adv. for the complainant.

                     OPs ex-parte vide order dated 06.11.2023.                        

 

O R D E R

 

1.         Sidharth (hereinafter referred to as “the complainant”) has filed the present complaint against the opposite parties (hereinafter referred to as the OPs) with the averments that the complainant is having a mobile phone I-Phone 12 PRO, IMEI No. 356690118818721 of market value Rs. 1,20,000/-. The abovesaid mobile fell down and got damaged. Thereafter, the complainant went to the shop of OP No.1 and made complaint about the defects, but at that time the OP no.1 was available there. Although on the advice of the OP no.1, the complainant handed over his phone to the employee of OP no.1, who was present in the shop. On asking of OP no.1 the complainant transferred an amount of Rs. 8000/- through G-pay UPI ID princeminocha287@okicici on mobile no.9992006118, towards mobile repair charges in the account of OP no.2. It is averred that after passing more than 10 days, when the complainant made a telephonic call to return his mobile phone, but inspite of returning the mobile phone, the OP no.1 prolonged the matter by one pretext or the other. Despite several visits, when the OP no.1 did not meet at his shop, the complainant contact one Kapil, the cousin of OP no.1 who was also running his shop in the name and style i-com Chit Chat Communication, Sheetal Life Style Mall, Opp. D-Park, Model Town, Rohtak who made an assurance that he would try his best to convince the OP no.1 for returning his mobile phone as well as amount paid to him. It is averred that after several requests and efforts, the OP no.1 returned the mobile phone in damaged condition as all the original  accessories like front and back camera, battery etc. were exchanged with local one and motherboard of the mobile phone was damaged completely with intent to put curtain on his wrong doings. It is worthwhile to mention here that at the time of handing over the mobile to the OP no.1 only front display, back glass and network bond of motherboard were damaged but at the time of returning back the said mobile, all the main accessories were exchanged by the OP no.1 with malafide intention. The complainant served a legal notice dated 15.08.2023 through his counsel Sh. Sandeep Gopalwas upon the OPs, which was duly received by them, but they neither gave any reply nor repaired his mobile set. A long period had passed and the complainant was suffering a lot of inconvenience due to lack of his mobile phone. So, there is gross negligence, harassment and deficiency in services on the part of the OPs., hence, this complaint has been filed by the complainant with a request to direct the OPs to return back Rs. 8,000/- for repairing of the mobile phone and also be ordered to make an amount of Rs. 1,20,000/- by doing the mobile phone fully damaged alongwith compensation and litigation expenses besides any other relief which this Commission may found deem fit and proper.

2.                Upon notice, none appeared on behalf of OPs and accordingly, they were proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 06.11.2023.

3.                In order to prove his case, the complainant has produced his duly sworn affidavit Ex.CW1/A and filed documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C10 and closed his evidence.

4.                We have heard argument advanced by the learned counsel for the complainant and gone through the entire material on record thoroughly and carefully.

5.                 The plea of the complainant is that his mobile phone I-Phone 12 PRO had fallen down and damaged  and to get the same repaired, he approached the OP No.1, who after checking the same, told to him that there was some fault/defect in the same and charges  for repairing would be Rs. 8,000/-. The said amount was paid by the complainant through UPI at the phone no. of OP no.2 He placed on record payment receipt Ex.C10 for Rs. 8,000/- for repairing the mobile phone.

6.                To support his case, the complainant had issued legal notice Ex.C4 and postal receipts for the same are on the case file. The complainant has submitted a sworn affidavit vide Ex.CW1/A in support of his allegations. The OPs have not appeared before this Commission despite service of notices. Hence, it may be assumed that OPs have preferred not to offer any comment. The allegations of the complainant regarding exchange the original accessories like camera, battery etc. with local one and mother board was damaged in the mobile set in question have not been proved. Hence, prayer  of the complainant to pay Rs.1,20,000/- being market value of the mobile phone finds no merit. However, payment of Rs.8,000/- has been made for repairing of the mobile phone has been proved as the payment was made through UPI to Mr. Prince Minocha (OP-2) as evident from Ex.C10. But the phone was not repaired. Accordingly, it would be in the interest of justice and fair play to refund the said amount of Rs.8,000/-

7.                In view of above facts & circumstances of the case, we hereby allowed the complaint and directed the OP no.1&2, jointly and severally to pay the amount of Rs. 8,000/- alongwith interest @9% from the date of payment i.e.24.05.2023 till its realization and shall also pay Rs. 5,000/- as compensation on account of deficiency in service and Rs. 5,000/- towards litigation charges.

8.                The above order be complied within 45 days from the date of this order failing which further interest @12% will be paid by the OPs for the delayed period.

9.                Certified copies of order be supplied to the parties free of costs and file be consigned to the record-room after due compliance.

Announced: