DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM: BHADRAK
Dated the 3rd day of August, 2018
Present:-
1. Shri Raghunath Kar, President
2. Shri Basanta Kumar Mallick, Member
3. Afsara Begum, Member
C.D Case No. 18 of 2016
Sri Deepak Kumar Sethy
S/o: Bhagirathi Sethy
At: Balipur
Po: Bandalo
Ps: Bhandaripokhari
Dist: Bhadrak
……………………. Complainant
(Versus)
1. Intex Technologies (India) Pvt. Ltd.
D- 18, Okhla Industrial Area
Phase- II, New Delhi
2. Hi-Tech Mobiles, Intex Care
At: Chorda By-pass (Near Sarita Hotel), Jajpur Road
Dist: Jajpur
3. Sriram Communication, Intex Care
At: Nayabazar (Near Rajghat Bridge), Bhadrak
Dist: Bhadrak
4. Jay Jalaram Technologies Pvt. Ltd.
Shope No- B 12/(B Type)
Ground Floor 21, Shopping Centre, Sector- 21
Gandhi Nagar, Gujrat
…………………………..Opp. Parties
Advocate For the Complainant: Sri B. Sahu (B)
Advocate For the O.Ps No. 1, 2 & 4: Ex-parte
Advocate For the OP No. 2: Sri Tapan Kumar Bhol
Date of hearing: 25.07.2016
Date of order: 03.08.2018
SRI RAGHUNATH KAR, PRESIDENT
The complainant has filed the complaint alleging against the O.Ps for deficiency of service, that the complainant had purchased on dt. 27.07.2015 one INTEX AQUA Y2 PRO mobile set bearing IMEI No. 911437951408857 from its dealer Jay Jalaram Technologies Pvt. Ltd. Shop No. B/12 (B Type) Ground Floor 21 Shopping Center, Sector- 21, Gandhinagar, Gujurat for Rs 4,150/- vide retail invoice No. GNR/R0003156/1516, dt. 27.07.2015. According to warranty term of the said mobile of the manufacture, it is for a period of one year and according to the warranty of Intex Technologies India Ltd. undertakes to get repaired free of charge through its authorized Intex Care partners of service dealers. The Intex Technologies Indai Ltd. has its Intex care partners throughout India including Bhadrak, Jajpur and also in other places in Odisha. The complainant is a resident of Bhadrak and when he was working at Gujurat, purchased a mobile set for his personal use from the dealer of Intex Technologies India Ltd. and according to warranty it can be repaired in anywhere at the places of Intex Care partners. The complainant left the place of Gujurat and during his stay at his village at Balipur, Bhadrak, he faced some problems in the mobile set LCD screen during the period of the warranty. So the complainant visited the store of Intex Care partners at Bhadark and showed the defects of the mobile set and after testing the defects of the mobile, he was unable to repair the same and instructed to visit another Intex Care partners at Jajpur Road. The complainant visited the store of Intex Care partners at Jajpur Road on 16.12.2015 and delivered the set at that store for repairing and the store has also given receipt bearing serial No. 112. Despite repeated visit to the store of Intex Care partner at Jajpur, the same set is not returned after repairing and they are demanding of Rs 1,200/- as estimated cost of repairing which is illegal as per terms of warranty. As the warranty extends its liability to be repaired free of cost then it can be claimed from the company and the complainant is not entitled to pay the same. Due to such illegal act of Intex Care partners the complainant has suffered a lot in financially, mentally. The cause of action arose on dt. 16.12.2015.
The complainant has sought for the reliefs:-
1. The OP No. 2 is to be directed to return back the mobile set to the complainant after repairing without claiming cost- 1 sheet.
2. The OP No. 2 may be awarded Rs 10,000/- for mental agony, cost of the litigation in favor of the complainant- 1 sheet.
Documents filed by the complainant (Xerox copy)
1. Warranty card of Intect Technology India Lt- 1 sheetd.
2. Customer details report of Intex – 1 sheet.
3. Retail invoice- 1 sheet.
The OP No. 3 have filed his written version as follows:-
The OP No. 3 has challenged the maintainability and non-joinder and mis-joinder of necessary party of this proceeding. The OP No. 3 has denied the facts that the complainant has visited the store of Intex Care partners at Bhadrak and showed the defects of the mobile set and after testing the defects of the mobile and he was unable to repair and instructed to visit another Intex Care at Jajpur Road. The OP No. 3 is a service provider he was unable to repair the said mobile. He has also denied the facts about harassment of the complainant physically and mentally. In fact the complainant has purchased the mobile set from OP No. 1 on dt. 27.07.2015. The complainant faced some problems in the mobile set LCD screen during his stay where is village Balipur Bhadrak. He has never visited Intex Care Bhadrak. Actually the complainant purchased the Intex mobile at Gujurat and visited the Intex Care situated at Jajpur Road Jajpur. The OP No. 3 has further challenged that all the O.Ps are belonging to outside the jurisdiction of District Bhadrak. So non of the O.Ps caused deficiency of service against the complainant. The OP No. 1, 2 & 4 have been set ex-parte due to non appearance & non filing of written version. The OP No. 3 has not filed a single page of document on behalf of him for supporting his stands.
OBSERVATION
We have already perused the complaint as well as the documents and the written version filed by the OP No. 3. It is a fact that the complainant had purchased on dt. 27.07.2015 one INTEX AQUA Y2 PRO mobile set bearing IMEI No. 911437951408857 from its dealer Jay Jalaram Technologies Pvt. Ltd. Shop No. B/12 (B Type) Ground Floor 21 Shopping Center, Sector- 21, Gandhinagar, Gujurat for Rs 4,150/- vide retail invoice No. GNR/R0003156/1516, dt. 27.07.2015. According to warranty term of the said mobile of the manufacture, it is for a period of one year and according to the warranty of Intex Technologies India Ltd. undertakes to get repaired free of charges through its authorized Intex Care partners of service dealers. It is a fact that the complainant visited the store of Intex Care partnet at Jajpur Road on 16.12.2015 and delivered the set at that store for repairing and the store has also given receipt bearing serial No. 112. Despite repeated visit to the store of Intex Care partner at Jajpur, the same set was not returned after repairing and the OP No. 2 demanded Rs 1,200/- as estimated cost for repairing. But the OP No. 3 has denied all the allegations claimed by the complainant against him. On the other hand he has resigned all the guiltiness upon the OP No. 2. As per the above discussion we have found that the OP No. 1 has sold a defective mobile to the complainant which had gone out of order before the expiry of warranty period and the OP No. 2 has received the mobile set from the complainant, repaired the same and demanding repairing charges Rs 1,200/- from the complainant. He has also kept the mobile set along with him and not delivering the complainant till yet. So the OP No. 2 has been found guilty because of causing deficiency of service against the complainant. The complainant has got the cause of action of this case. He has properly filed the complaint in the proper Forum having adequate jurisdiction. The present complaint is neither devoid of non-joinder and mis-joinder of necessary party as well as having proper cause of action and limitation. The complainant has solely claimed the article as well as the cost and compensation from the OP No. 2. Hence it is ordered;
ORDER
The complaint be and the same is allowed on contest against the OP No. 3 and ex-parte against OP No. 1, 2 & 4. The OP No. 2 is here by directed to return the mobile set to the complainant after repairing the same without demanding any repairing cost from the complainant. OP No. 2 is also directed to pay the complainant Rs 2,000/- towards compensation for mental agony and suffering as well as Rs 2,000/- for cost of the litigation. The OP No. 2 shall carry out this order within 30 days on receipt of the same.
This order is pronounced in the open Forum on this day of 3rd August, 2018 under my hand and seal of the Forum.
