Mr.Anoop Sharma, Presiding Member

1.       Sh.Simranjeet Singh  has brought the instant complaint under the Consumer Protection Act,  on the allegations that  he purchased one Intex Mobile handset from Opposite Party No.3 vide invoice No. 1259 dated 14.8.2015 for Rs.5800/- with one year warranty being manufactured/ marketed by Opposite Party No.1 and the Opposite Party No.2 is the authorised service centre of Opposite Party No.1, hence the complainant is a consumer as provided under the Act and is competent to invoke the jurisdiction of this Forum. Said mobile hand set became non functional and the touch doesn’t work on 2.5.2016 and the complaint to the effect was made to the Opposite Party No.2 who kept the Mobile Set with it and did not return the same till the filing of the present complaint, as according to them the requisite parts were not available with them and told the complainant to come later every time he visits them. Thereafter, inspite of several personal visits and calls by the complainant, the Opposite Parties failed to rectify the said Mobile Set of the complainant till the filing of the present complaint. The aforesaid acts of the Opposite Parties in not repairing the Mobile Set to the satisfaction of the complainant inspite of warranty is an act of deficiency in services, mal practices, unfair trade practice and has caused lot of mental agony, harassment, inconvenience besides financial loss to the complainant. Vide this complaint, the complainant has sought the following reliefs:-

a)       Opposite Parties be directed to set right the Mobile Set of the complainant to his satisfaction or in alternative refund Rs.5800/- from the date of payment till realization.

b)      Opposite Parties be directed to pay compensation of Rs.20000/- to the complainant.

c)       Opposite Parties be directed to pay the adequate cost of the litigation.

d)      Any other consequential relief to which the complainant is entitled to under the law, equity, justice and fairplay be also awarded.

Hence the present complaint.    

2.       Upon notice, none appeared on behalf of the Opposite Parties, hence  Opposite Parties were also proceeded against exparte vide order dated 12.6.2017 of this Forum.   

3.       Complainant tendered into evidence his affidavit Ex.C1 alongwith copy of bill Ex.C2, copy of job sheet Ex.C3 and closed the exparte evidence on behalf of the complainant.

4.       We have carefully gone through the pleadings of the complainant; arguments advanced by the ld.counsel for the complainant and have appreciated the evidence produced on record by the complainant with the valuable assistance of the ld.counsel for the complainant.

5.       From the record i.e. pleadings of the parties and averments of the complaint and evidence produced on record by the complainant, it stands fully proved on record that  the complainant purchased one Intex Mobile handset from Opposite Party No.3 vide invoice No. 1259 dated 14.8.2015 for Rs.5800/- with one year warranty being manufactured/ marketed by Opposite Party No.1, copy of bill accounts for Ex.C2  and the Opposite Party No.2 is the authorised service centre of Opposite Party No.1, hence the complainant is a consumer as provided under the Act and is competent to invoke the jurisdiction of this Forum. Said mobile hand set became non functional and the touch doesn’t work on 2.5.2016 and the complaint to the effect was made to the Opposite Party No.2 who kept the Mobile Set with it and did not return the same till the filing of the present complaint, as according to them the requisite parts were not available with them and told the complainant to come later every time he visits them, copy of the job sheet accounts for Ex.C3. Thereafter, inspite of several personal visits and calls by the complainant, the Opposite Parties failed to rectify the said Mobile Set of the complainant till the filing of the present complaint. The complainant proved all these averments through his affidavit Ex.C1  and also proved on record copies of bill Ex.C2 and copy of job sheet Ex.C3.  The evidence produced on record  by the complainant remained unrebutted and unchallenged  as none appeared on behalf of  Opposite Parties to defend its case despite sufficient opportunities provided to them nor  dared to file an affidavit to rebut the case of the complainant.

6.       So, from the entire unrebutted evidence produced by the complainant on record, it stands fully proved on record that there is certainly deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the Opposite Parties. As per the averment of the complainant,  as according to Opposite Parties, the requisite parts of the Mobile Set in dispute were not available with them, so there is no possibility for its repair and in these circumstances,  we direct the Opposite Parties jointly and severally directed to  refund the price of Rs.5800/- of the Mobile Set in question to the complainant, within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. All the Opposite Parties  are also jointly and severally  directed to pay Rs.1,000/- to the complainant on account of compensation for causing him mental tension and harassment besides Rs.500/- as costs of litigation.   Copies of the orders be furnished to the parties free of cost. File is ordered to be consigned to the record room.

Announced in Open Forum.