Present (1) Nisha Nath Ojha,
District & Sessions Judge (Retd.) President
(2) Smt. Karishma Mandal,
Member
(3) Anil Kumar Singh
Member
Date of Order : 19.11.2018
Nisha Nath Ojha
- In the instant case the Complainant has sought for following reliefs against the Opposite party:-
- To direct the opposite parties to either to repair the mobile set to the satisfaction of the complainant or to replace the said mobile set with another set of same model or to refund the cost of the mobile i.e. Rs. 4,800/- with 12% interest.
- To direct the opposite parties to pay Rs. 20,000/- compensation for physical harassment and mental agony.
- To direct the opposite parties to pay Rs. 20,000/- compensation for loss.
- To direct the opposite parties to deposit Rs. 50,000/- as Consumer Welfare Fund.
- The facts of this case lies in a narrow compass which is as follows:-
The complainant has asserted that he has purchased a Intex Aqua Q5 mobile set having IMEI no. 911448150429271 from the shop of opposite party no. 3 on 10.10.2015 at the cost of Rs. 4,800/- as will appear from annexure – 1. As per terms of warranty the manufacturer has given warranty of one year.
It is further case of the complainant that after six months from the date of purchase vide annexure – 1 the mobile began to hang and even screen was not also proper functioning. Besides the aforesaid defects there were also some minor defects. For rectifying the aforesaid defect stated above, the complainant approached opposite party no. 3 who repaired the mobile set and returned to the complainant but again within four months of the said repair the mobile set become defective and the defects stated above again resurfaced. The complainant again took the mobile to the shop of opposite party no. 3 on 05.08.2016. The opposite party no. 3 again kept the mobile to get it repaired from opposite party no. 2 and the complainant was directed to take delivery of the mobile from opposite party no. 2. The complainant repeatedly approached the opposite party no. 3 who told that his mobile is under repair and he would deliver his mobile after the same is delivered to opposite party no. 3 by opposite party no. 2 after repair. On 07.08.2016 when the complainant visited the shop of opposite party no. 3 he was handed over another mobile of different model. The opposite party no. 3 informed the complainant that this mobile set has been delivered by opposite party no. 2. After 15 days of the delivery of replaced mobile set, this mobile also become out of order and stopped functioning at all. The complainant approached opposite party no. 3 with second mobile set because the same was also still not functioning. The complainant was told to approach opposite party no. 3 who informed that part of mobile is not available and also admitted that there is inherent defect in the mobile. The complainant was perturbed when the opposite party no. 3 refused to repair the mobile.
The complainant has also asserted that the very fact that defective mobile purchased vide annexure – 1 was again replaced by defective mobile and lastly the opposite party refused either to replace or return the price of the mobile shows the deficiency of opposite parties.
The grievance of the complainant is that the mobile set has not been replaced or repaired by the opposite party no. 2 despite several reminders and legal notice.
From the record it appears that registered notice sent to the opposite parties did not return unserved and notice on opposite party no. 1 returned with memo “refused” then vide order dated 01.06.2017 valid Tamila was declared. Thereafter, sufficient opportunity was allowed to the opposite parties to file written statement but when the opposite party neither appeared nor filed written statement then the opposite parties have been debarred from filing written statement vide order dated 23.05.2018 and this case was heard ex – parte.
-
From bare perusal of complaint petition it appears that as all the facts stated above has been stated on oath and there is no counter version of the opposite parties hence we are bound to accept the fact stated in the complaint petition which clearly disclose deficiency on the part of opposite parties.
For the reason stated above we direct opposite parties to refund Rs. 4,800/- ( Rs. Four Thousand Eight Hundred only) to the complainant within the period of two months from the date of receipt of this order or certified copy of this order failing which opposite parties will pay 10% interest on the above said amount of Rs. 4,800/- ( Rs. Four Thousand Eight Hundred only) till its final payment.
Opposite party is further directed to pay Rs. 2,000/- (Rs. Two Thousand only) to the complainant by way of compensation and litigation cost within the period of two month.
Accordingly, this complaint stands allowed to the extent referred above.
Member Member(F) President
