| ORDER | BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, AMRITSAR. Consumer Complaint No.228 of 2015 Date of Institution: 13-04-2015 Date of Decision: 24-06-2015 Sh.Ajay (aged 24 years) son of Sh.Roshan Lal resident of Chur Beri, Opposite Shivala, Amritsar. Complainant Versus - Intex Technology India Limited, through its Chairman/ Manager, D/18/2, Okhla Industrial Area, Phase II, New Delhi.
- Perfect Mobile Repair Center through its proprietor Vinay Sharma, Shop No. 19-20, Simran Plaza Market, 210-A, Queens Road, Amritsar.
- Love, Manager of Perfect Mobile Repair Center, Shop No. 19-20, Simran Plaza Market, 210-A, Queens Road, Amritsar.
Opposite Parties Complaint under section 11/ 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 as amended upto date. Present: For the Complainant: Sh. Kanwar Pahul Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Parties No.1 to 3: Exparte Quorum: Sh.Bhupinder Singh, President Ms.Kulwant Kaur Bajwa, Member Mr.Anoop Sharma, Member Order dictated by: Sh.Bhupinder Singh, President. - Present complaint has been filed by Sh.Ajay under the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act alleging therein that he purchased Intex Mobile Set from Opposite Party No.1 and immediately after the purchase of the said Mobile Set, it became defective and the complainant submitted the Mobile Set in question to Opposite Parties and they replaced the same to the complainant, but the replaced Mobile Set was also defective and the complainant immediately approached the Opposite Parties and handed over the said Mobile Set with Opposite Parties vide job sheet bearing No. 2288 on 9.12.2014 and assured the complainant that the Opposite Parties will hand over the Mobile Set in question to the complainant within 15 days. Thereafter, the complainant visited the Opposite Parties on so many occasions to receive the Mobile Set, but all the times, the complainant received no response from the Opposite Parties. Alleging the same to be deficiency in service, complaint was filed seeking directions to the opposite parties to hand over the new Mobile Set after replacing the old one. Compensation and litigation expenses were also demanded.
- On notice, none appeared on behalf of the Opposite Parties, so the Opposite Parties were proceeded against exparte vide order dated 28.5.2015 of this Forum.
- Complainant tendered into evidence his affidavit Ex.C1 alongwith documents Ex.C2 to Ex.C7 and closed the evidence on behalf of the complainant.
- We have carefully gone through the pleadings of the parties; 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.
- From the record i.e. averments of the complaint and the evidence produced on record by the complainant, it stands fully proved on record that the complainant purchased one Intex Mobile Set vide Invoice No.166 dated 7.5.2014 Ex.C2. Complainant alleges that said Mobile Set immediately after the purchase of the said Mobile Set, became defective and the Opposite Parties replaced the same to the complainant with new one, but unfortunately, repaired Mobile Set given to the complainant was also defective. The complainant approached the Opposite Parties vide job sheet dated 9.12.2104 Ex.C4 and handed over the Mobile Set to Opposite Party No.2 the authorized service centre of Opposite Party No.1 with complaint ‘no power on’. Said Mobile Set could not be repaired by Opposite Party No.2 and the Mobile Set is still lying with Opposite Party No.2. Opposite Party No.2 wanted to hand over another stand-bye/ used Mobile Set to the complainant, but the complainant refused to receive the same. Since then, the Mobile Set of the complainant is lying with Opposite Party No.2 and they failed to repair the same.
- In order to prove his case, the complainant produced on record his duly sworn affidavit Ex.C1. He also produced on record the copy of invoice of Mobile Set dated 7.5.2014 Ex.C2, copy of job sheet dated 9.12.2014 Ex.C4 and copy of job sheet dated 14.2.2015 Ex.C5. Thereafter, the complainant also served legal notice on the Opposite Parties Ex.C6 through registered post, postal receipt of which is Ex.C7, but inspite of that, the Opposite Parties failed to repair the Mobile Set of the complainant and the Mobile Set is still lying with Opposite Party No.2. Aforesaid evidence produced by the complainant remained unrebutted and unchallenged. Even none appeared on behalf of Opposite Parties despite service to contest the complaint of the complainant nor any person dared to file the affidavit on behalf of the Opposite Parties to rebut the evidence produced on record by the complainant. So, it stands fully proved on record that the Mobile Set of the complainant is not repairable.
- Resultantly, the complaint is allowed exparte with cost and the Opposite Parties No.1 & 2 are directed to return the Mobile Set of the complainant fully repaired to the satisfaction of the complainant without charging any amount as it became defective within warranty period. In case the Mobile Set of the complainant is not repairable, then the Opposite Parties No.1 & 2 are directed to replace the same with new one of same make and model or refund the amount of the Mobile Set in question to the complainant, within one month from the date of receipt of copy of this order, failing which the Opposite Parties No.1 & 2 shall be liable to pay interest @ 9% per annum on the amount of the Mobile Set, from the date of filing the complaint till the payment is made to the complainant. The Opposite Parties No.1 & 2 are also directed to pay the costs of litigation to the tune of Rs.1,000/- to the complainant. Copies of the order be furnished to the parties free of cost. File is ordered to be consigned to the record room.
Dated: 24-06-2015. (Bhupinder Singh) President hrg (Anoop Sharma) (Kulwant Kaur Bajwa) Member Member | |
