Orissa

Cuttak

CC/89/2018

Biraj Swain - Complainant(s)

Versus

Ingo Labs Pvt Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

B K Sinha

26 Sep 2019

ORDER

 IN THE COURT OF THE DIST. CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,CUTTACK.

C.C No.89/2018

Biraj Swain represented through her brother

Sri Biplab Swain,S/O:Late Bighneswar Swain,

At:688/b Kathagola,Mangalabag,

PO/PS:Mangalabag:Dist:Cuttack,Odisha.                                               .… Complainant.

 

Vrs.

Ingo Labs Pvt. Ltd.,represented through its directors,

114, Street No.7,

Near Water tank & Shivalayam Temple,

Gautaminagar Colony,Meerpet,Hyderabad.… Opp. Party.

 

Present:               Sri Dhruba Charan Barik,President.

                  Smt. Sarmistha Nath, Member (W).

 

Date of filing:    13.08.2019

Date of Order:  26.09.2019

 

For the complainant  :    Sri B.K.Sinha,Adv. & Associates.

For the O.Ps.                :   None

 

Smt. Sarmistha Nath,Member(W).

 

                The complainant has filed this complaint before this Forum against the O.Ps for Redressal of his grievances under the Consumer Protection Act,1986(Act in short) in terms of his prayer made in the complaint petition alleging deficiency in service on the part of O.P.

1. Case of the complainant in brief is that the complainant,Biraj Swain, is presently residing in New Delhi and due to her non-availability she has given her authorization to her brother, Biplab Swain, to look after all the legal proceedings which is attached as Annexure-1.  The complainant has been a customer of GPS tracking services of the O.P from 13.9.2013.  He had purchased two Global Positioning System (GPS) from the O.P.  On 01.06.2017, the complainant informed the O.P regarding the tracking issues of his vehicle but the O.P in reply informed about their unavailability of record of the device and threatened the complainant to block their services.  The complainant communicated with the O.P through WhatsApp on their numbers, i.e. 9063002002 and 9700025002 which are handled by three of its call centre executives.  The executives refused to handle any technical calls made by the complainant.  The complainant contacted the O.P regarding the issues of his GPS device but the O.P never attended his calls and threatened the complainant to block his services unless he purchases a new device from the O.P.  Then the complainant purchased a new device from the O.P on payment of Rs.12,000/- and the amount was cleared on 7.6.2017.  True copies of invoice bill and photos of the new device are attached as Annexure-2 series.

On 15.56.2-17 the complainant received through speed post parcel vide No.EN144041580TN containing duplicate/non-original/tampered GPS tracking device items without any warranty or manual certificates from the O.P.The above items are not in consonance with the original GPS devices provided by the O.P in their Website Goods received was not according to specifications and two PP1 batteries were missing.The complainant took the above matter into the knowledge of the O.P on the very date of receiving the said GPS device.True copy of the e.mail of the complainant to the O.P regarding the above said issue asking about the warranty certificates is attached as Annexure-3 series and the copy of the e.mail of the complainant to the O.P regarding the tampered condition of the device and other missing particulars is attached as Aannexure-4.The complainant was assured by the customer service personnel that he will be getting the manuals within a day but he never got it and he was unable to use the device without the manuals.After that the O.P refused to comply to the grievance of the complainant.Till date, the complainant has been requesting the O.P either to deliver the manuals and PP1 batteries to him or refund him the price of two PP1 batteries. The above said action of the O.P amounts to deficiency in service and thecomplainant has prayed for a direction to the O.P to pay compensation of Rs.16,000/- towards financial loss, Rs.25,000/- for harassment and mental agony, Rs.20,000/- for waste of time and energy and litigation cost of Rs.20,000/-.

2. The O.P neither appeared nor filed written version, hence the O.P was set exparte.
3. We have heard from the advocate of the complainant, gone through the documents and paper filed by the complainant and the pleadings.  On consideration of uncontroverted averments made by the complainant, it is held that there is deficiency in service on the part of O.P.  Hence ordered;

                    ORDER

The case be and the same is allowed exparte against the O.P.  In the facts and circumstances of the case, the O.P is directed to pay Rs.12,000/- towards financial loss due to deficiency in service, Rs.10,000/- as compensation for harassment and mental agony and Rs.10,000/- towards litigation cost to the complainant within a period 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

`               Typed to dictation, corrected and pronounced by the Hon’ble Member in the Open Court on this the 26^th  day of September,2019  under the seal and signature of this Forum.

 

  ( Smt. Sarmistha Nath )

                      Member (W)                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 (Sri D.C.Barik)

                                                                                                               President