DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BHIWANI.

   CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO.54 of 17

                                           DATE OF INSTITUTION: - 24.03.2017

                                                     DATE OF ORDER: -16.06.2017

Nirmla Devi wife of late Sh. Ramesh Chand Bhardwaj, resident of 342/4, Krishna Colony near Railway Fatak, Swarg Ashram, Bhiwani.

           ……………Complainant.

VERSUS

1. Jeenu Gift Shop 52, Adrash College Market, Hansi Gate, Bhiwani.

1. Intex Customer Care, Fancy Chowk, Near Jalan Hospital, Bhiwani.

1. Intex Technologies (P) Ltd., D-18/2, Okhla Industrial Area, Phase-II, New Delhi.

………….. Opposite Parties.

COMPLAINT U/S 12 & 13 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT

BEFORE: -  Shri Rajesh Jindal, President

                    Mrs. Sudesh, Member

                   Mr. Parmod Kumar, Member

Present:-      Sh. Pardeep Bhardwaj, representative of complainant.

OPs exparte.

ORDER:-

Rajesh Jindal, President:

                 Brief facts of the present complaint are that on dated 30.04.2016 the complainant had purchased mobile of Intex amounting to Rs. 1600/- with one year warranty from OP no. 1.  It is alleged that the soon after purchase, the handset became defective.  It is further alleged that she went to the office of OPs many times for repairing the same but to no avail.  The complainant further alleged that due to the act and conduct of the Ops he has to suffer mental agony, physical harassment and economic loss.  Hence, it amounts to deficiency in service on the part of OPs and as such, she has to file the present complaint.

2.                 OPs no. 1 to 3  have failed to come present.  Hence they were proceeded against exparte vide order dated 04.05.2017.

3.                 Representative of complainant reiterated the contents of the complaint.  He submitted that the mobile handset in question was purchased by the complainant for Rs. 1600/- from OP no. 1 with one year warranty.  He submitted that the mobile handset started trouble due to defect in the mobile handset.  The complainant approached to the care centre of the mobile handset, the OP no. 2 refused to repair the mobile handset to the complainant illegally.

4.                 The OPs did not bother to appear and contest the claim of the complainant and failed to put their stand towards the complaint of the complainant.  Prima facie, the contention of the complainant seems to be maintainable in the absence of any rebuttal.  Considering the facts of the case, we partly allow the complaint of the complainant and direct the OPs to refund the cost of mobile handset  i.e. Rs. 1600/- and also to pay Rs. 400/- as compensation.  The OPs are directed to pay Rs. 2,000/- within 30 days from the date of passing of this order and the complainant is directed to deposit the mobile handset alongwith accessories with the OPs immediately.  The OPs are directed to pay the said amount of Rs. 2,000/- to the complainant through demand draft drawn in her favour and the same be sent on the address of the complainant as given in the complaint. Certified copies of the order be sent to the parties free of costs.  File be consigned to the record room, after due compliance.

Announced in open Forum.

Dated: 16.06.2017.                                               

                                                                                  (Rajesh Jindal)

                                                                                       President,      

                                                                           District Consumer Disputes

                                                                           Redressal Forum, Bhiwani.

(Parmod Kumar)      (Sudesh)            

                        Member.               Member