Haryana

Karnal

CC/1/2017

Nirmal Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Infinity Enterprises - Opp.Party(s)

R.K. Dankher

11 Oct 2017

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM KARNAL. 

                                                     Complaint No.01 of 2017

                                                    Date of instt.02.01.2017

                                                     Date of decision 11.10.2017

 

Nirmal Singh aged 53 years son of Shri Ishwar Singh, resident of House no.E-14, Hospital Area, Nilokheri, District Karnal.

                                                                                 ……..Complainant.

                                        Versus.

1. Infinity Enterprises, BS-199, 4^th floor, Shalimar Bagh, Delhi-110088, through its Managing Director/Chief, Executive Officer/Authorized Signatory.

2. New Mass Communication, SCO no.152, 1^st floor, Mugal Canal Market, Karnal-132001, through its partner/proprietor/authorized signatory.

                                                                  ..…Opposite Parties.

 

       Complaint u/s 12  of the Consumer Protection Act 1986.

 

Before     Sh. Jagmal Singh……….President.

                Ms. Veena Rani………Member

                Sh.Anil Sharma…….Member.

 

 

Present:   Sh.R.D.DhankarAdvocate for the complainant.

                 Opposite parties exparte.

       

                (JAGMAL SINGH, PRESIDENT)

 

 

 ORDER:

 

                This complaint has been filed by the complainant u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986, on the averments that on 20.7.2016 he placed an order I.D.no.4071933610713  to Le.mall.com for online purchasing a Smart Phone Model Le 2 Rose Gold, shipping bearing sr. no.LP032C76E6270021237, IMEI no.867466023583961 for  a total consideration of Res.11,999/-. He received the delivery of the said phone on 22.7.2016. After receipt of the mobile he started using the same with the BSNL Sim Card, but he noticed that the mobile set in question was having a defect and on account of the defect said mobile phone is unable to connect with the Internet Services. He immediately contacted with the opposite party no.1 through e-mail message as well as telephonic message on toll free no.180030101838 and duly informed about the defect/problem in the mobile set. Opposite party no.1 informed him that the return policy of the device is within 10 days from the date of purchasing/receiving the mobile. He approached the opposite party no.1 within 10 days i.e. on 30.10.2016 through e-mail message and telephonically. Opposite party no.1 assured him a pick-up man would come to his house for brining the defective phone, but after sufficiently waiting neither any pick-up man came nor cost of the mobile set refunded. Under such compelling circumstances, he approached the opposite party no.2 for deduction of fault in said smart phone and opposite party no.2 kept the mobile phone, vide unit receipt no.2295 dated 17.8.2016 and issued a repair order/job-sheet no.201608190338 dated 19.8.2016 and also assured that the mobile phone would be returned within 10 days after deduction of its fault. After that he visited the opposite party no.2 for taking his phone, opposite party no.2 returned the mobile phone to him without any rectification with the similar problem of not connecting the internet services. Therefore, he got served a legal notice dated 30.11.2016 upon opposite parties, but the same also did not yield any result. In this way, there was deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties, due to which he suffered mental pain and agony apart from financial loss.

2.             Notice of the complaint was given to opposite parties. None put into appearance on behalf of opposite parties despite service, therefore, exparte proceedings were initiated against them, vide order dated 13.2.2017.

3.             Complainant tendered into evidence his affidavit Ex.AW1/A and documents A-1 to A-4 and mark A to Mark F.

4              We have heard the learned counsel for the complainant and have also gone through the documents placed on file carefully.

5.             The complainant booked a mobile phone Model Le 2 Rose Gold online from Le.Mall.com for a sum of Rs.11,999/ on 20.7.2016 and he received the said phone on 22.7.2016. As per allegations of the complainant when he used the said phone after inserting the sim card, the complainant noticed that the said phone was unable to connect with the Internet Services, so he reported the matter to opposite party no.1, who assured him that a pick-up man came to his house for brining the defective phone and price money of the phone would be refunded to him, but no pick-up boy came to his house. Thereafter, he visited  to the authorized service centre of the company i.e. opposite party no.2, who kept the hand set for rectification of defects, but did not rectify the defects and returned the mobile set having same problem. The version of the complainant is supported by his affidavit and documents A-1 to A-4 Mark A to F. On the other hand, there is no evidence of the opposite parties as the opposite parties have been proceeded against exparte. Thus, evidence of the complainant has gone unrebutted and unchallenged, therefore, there is no reason to disbelieve the same. In these circumstances of the case, we are of the considered view that the mobile set of the complainant is defective from the very beginning. Hence the opposite parties are deficient in providing service to the complainant.

6.             As a sequel to the foregoing reasons, we accept the present complaint and direct the opposite parties to pay Rs.11,999/- the value of the mobile set to the complainant. We further direct the opposite parties to pay Rs.2000/- on account of mental agony and harassment and litigation charges. This order shall be complied within 30 days from the receipt of copy of this order failing which the complainant is entitled for interest @ 8% per annum from the date of order till realization. The parties concerned be communicated of the order accordingly and the file be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Announced

Dated: 11.10.2017

                                                                        (Jagmal Singh)

                                                                           President,

                                                         District Consumer Disputes

                                                       Redressal Forum, Karnal.

 

 

                        (Veena Rani)       (Anil Sharma)

                          Member                Member