Before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Rohtak.
Consumer Complaint No. 166
Instituted on: 02/04/2019
Decided on: 29.11.2024
Kapil Gulati S/o Sh. Raman Gulati age 27 years, R/o 1181/19, Hari Nagar, Near BSNL Exchange, HUDA Complex, Rohtak (Haryana).
….Complainant
Vs
- Jagdamba Mobile Communication, Shop No.3, Shankar Market, Railway Road, Rewari-123401 through Incharge.
- VIVO Service Centre, SCF-23, First Floor, Civil Road, Near Induslnd Bank, Rohtak-124001.
- VIVO Mobile India Pvt. Ltd. H.O. 10th and 11th floor, Emaar Palam Springs Plaza, Golf Course Road, DLF Phase-5, Sector-54, Gurugram, Haryana Pin code-122003.
……Opposite Parties
COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 12 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT.
BEFORE: SH. NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT.
DR. TRIPTI PANNU, MEMBER.
DR. VIJDENER SINGH, MEMBER.
Present: None for complainant.
Sh.Amit Kumar for opposite Party no.1 in person.
Sh. KunalJuneja, Advocate for opposite Party no.2 and 3.
ORDER
NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT:
1. Brief facts of the present compliant, as per complainant, are that he purchased a VIVO V9 Black Mobile Phone for Rs.22,990/- on 08.06.2018 from opposite party no.1 who is authorized seller of opposite party no.3. From the very beginning, the mobile phone was not functioning properly. During the warranty period on 02.02.2019, the complainant lodged a complaint with authorized service centre-opposite party no.2 about non-functioning of said mobile phone and took his mobile to the service centre and it was repaired. Thereafter on 19.02.2019, the phone was again taken to service centre due to low battery backup and issues with the rear camera. It was repaired again but the phone still did not function properly. The complainant was cheated by the opposite parties with false assurances of repair or replacement during the warranty period. The opposite parties have harassed the complainant by refusing to repair or replace the defective phone which amounts to deficiency in service. It is evident that the mobile phone has a manufacturing defect and defective piece has been supplied to the complainant. Hence this complaint and it has been prayed that the opposite parties be directed to pay the amount of Rs.22,990/- with interest from the date of purchase and to pay Rs.11,000/- for harassment and litigation expenses to the complainant.
2. Notices of the present complaint were issued to the opposite parties. Opposite parties appeared and filed their written statement and admitted the fact of purchase of Mobile phone of VIVO V9 Black Colour on 08.06.2018 by the complainant and further stated that the said phone was duly checked by the complainant at the time of purchase. The Phone purchased by the complainant was a new piece and was working properly. If the phone would have any defect, the same would have shown troubles since beginning but the complainant had never visited the service centre before 02.02.2019. He visited to the service centre on 02.02.2019 with the complaints like hanging and low battery backup. The opposite party inspected the phone and found that the same was having issues due to bad software as the complainant had installed more than 85 applications in the said phone that exceeded storage limit. The opposite party resolved these issues by updating the software. Therefore, the problem was not due to any manufacturing defect. Further, the visit of complainant on 19.02.2019 with same issues, was found false as the phone was working properly. The opposite parties have never refused any service rather they had provided effective service to the complainant without delay or negligence. There is also no unpleasant action by the opposite parties to put them in the fault nor any proof regarding negligence and illegal act has been provided by the complainant. Hence, it is prayed that the complaint may be dismissed with exemplary cost in favour of opposite parties and against the complainant.
3. Complainant in his evidence has tendered affidavit Ex. CW1/A and documents Ex. C-1 to Ex. C-4 and closed the same on 09.09.2022. On the other hand, Sh. Pradeep Kumar, AR of respondents in his evidence tendered affidavit Ex. RW1/A, document Ex. R-1 and closed the same on 31.01.2023.
4. We have heard the arguments of learned counsel for the opposite parties, perused the documents placed on record and have gone through material aspects of the case very carefully.
5 In the present case, complainant had purchased the mobile set on 08.06.2018 for Rs.22990/- as is proved from the bill Ex.C1. As per the complainant, the alleged mobile set became defective within short period and the same could not be repaired by the opposite parties despite his repeated requests. To prove his case, complainant has placed on record job sheet Ex.C2 and Ex.C3. As per this job sheet Ex.C2 dated 19.02.2019, there was problem of “Battery back up very low, has to charge twice in day, rear camera sometimes gets blur/after restart gets ok”. As per job sheet Ex.C3/Ex.R1 dated 02.02.2019 there were complaints about the “phone hanging and low battery backup” and after checking it was found that the said defects were due to excessive application installation (over 85 apps) that exceeded storage limits. The opposite parties resolved these issues by updating the software. No other job sheet has been placed on record by the complainant. Complainant has also not come present before this Commission for the last two dates. However, we have perused the affidavit and documents placed on record by the complainant. As per the job sheets placed on record by both the parties, his mobile set has been repaired by the opposite parties and no other job sheet has been placed on record after 19.02.2019. Hence there is no deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties and present complaint stands dismissed with no order as to costs.
6. Application(s) pending, if any, stand disposed of in terms of the aforesaid judgment.
7. Copy of this order be supplied to both the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.
Announced in open court:
29.11.2024
........................................................
Nagender Singh Kadian, President
..........................................
TriptiPannu, Member.
……………………………….
Vijender Singh, Member
