Before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Rohtak.

                                                          Complaint No. : 141.

                                                          Instituted on     : 11.04.2014.

                                                          Decided on       : 11.02.2015.

Akash s/o Sh. Subhash Chander R/o Wazirpur Tehsil Beri Distt. Jhajjar.

                                                          ………..Complainant.

                             Vs.

1. Intex Mobile Co. D-18/2, Okhla Industrial Area, Phase-2, New Delhi-110020.
2. Sachin Communication Near Old Bus Stand, Ambedkar Chowk, Jhajjar Mobile no.9253087530.
3. Intex Mobile Care, Opposite Sawan Banquet Hall, Labour Chowk, Rohtak Ph.No.8059116464.

                                                     ……….Opposite parties.

          COMPLAINT U/S 12 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,1986.

BEFORE:  SH.JOGINDER KUMAR JAKHAR, PRESIDENT.

                   MS. KOMAL KHANNA, MEMBER.

Present:       Complainant in person.

                   Opposite party no.2 exparte.

                   Ms. Rajni AR for opposite party no.1 & 3.

                                      ORDER

SH. JOGINDER KUMAR JAKHAR, PRESIDENT :

1.                          The present complaint has been filed by the complainant with the averments that he had purchased mobile phone Intex Cloud Zed-5 from the opposite party on 26.11.2013 from the opposite party no.2 for a sum of Rs.7300/-. It is averred that the alleged mobile phone was defective so he deposited the same with the opposite party on 11.02.2014 for rectification of fault but despite his repeated visits the mobile was not repaired and the complainant had suffered a great mental agony and harassment due to the deficiency in service on the part of opposite party. As such it is averred that opposite parties be directed to replace the mobile set of the complainant and further prayed to impose a penalty Rs.50000/- upon the opposite parties for harassing the complainant.

2.                          On notice opposite party no.1 vide order dated 22.05.2014 and opposite party no.3 vide order dated 18.9.2014 of this Forum were proceeded against exparte. Opposite party no.2 filed its written reply submitting therein that opposite party no.2 is only authorized dealer of opposite party no.1 and being the dealer opposite party no.2 does not repair any mobile handset. It is averred that the opposite party no.2 is not liable to replace the handset or pay any compensation and dismissal of complaint has been sought.

3.                          Complainant led evidence in support of his case.

4.                          Complainant in his evidence has tendered affidavit Ex.CW1/A, documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C5 and has closed his evidence. On the other hand, opposite party no.2 was proceeded against exparte vide order dated 12.01.2015 of this Forum. However opposite party no.1 & 3 joined the proceedings at the time of arguments.  Regarding the joining of proceeding we have placed reliance upon the law cited in 2008(4) CCC 94 (P & H) titled as Bijay Kumar Vs. Shri Sanatan Dharam High School whereby Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court has held that: “A defendant proceeded exparte can join and participate in the proceedings at the stage at which he appears without getting the exparte order set aside” and the same is fully applicable on the facts and circumstances of the case. Opposite party no.1 & 3 vide statement dated 04.02.2015 has stated that they are ready to give new sealed box of INTEX Aqua I-4 having MRP Rs.7990/- having more value of the mobile of complainant.

5.                          We have heard ld. counsel for the complainant as well as opposite party no.1 & 3 and have gone through the material aspects of the case carefully.

6.                          In the present case it is not disputed that complainant had purchased a mobile set from the opposite party for a sum of Rs.7300/-. It is also not disputed that the defect appeared in the mobile set within warranty period and the opposite party no.1 & 3 are ready to replace the mobile set of the complainant.

7.                          In view of the facts and circumstances of the case it is directed that the opposite party no.1 & 3 shall replace the mobile set of the complainant as agreed vide their statement dated 04.02.2015 and shall also pay a sum of Rs.1500/-(Rupees fifteen hundred only) as litigation expenses to the complainant within 15 days from the date of decision and in turn the complainant shall return the accessories of the mobile set to the opposite parties as the mobile set is already with the opposite parties. Complaint is allowed accordingly.

8.                          Copy of this order be supplied to both the parties free of costs.

9.                          File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Announced in open court:

11.02.2015.

                                                          ................................................

                                                          Joginder Kumar Jakhar, President

                                                          ..........................................

                                                          Komal Khanna, Member.