Punjab

Sangrur

CC/462/2016

Jagtar Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Jain Telecom - Opp.Party(s)

Shri Sandip Kumar Goyal

09 Nov 2016

ORDER

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SANGRUR

                  

                                                                  Complaint no. 462                                                                                         

                                                                  Instituted on:   25.07.2016                                                 

                                                                  Decided on:    09.11.2016

 

Jagtar Singh son of Magher Singh resident of  village Bhunder Bhaini, Tehsil Moonak, District Sangrur.

                                                …. Complainant

                                Versus

 

1. Jain Telecom near Stadium, Moonak Sangrur through its Proprietor.
2. Intex Technologies ( i) Ltd. D-18/2, Okhla Industrial Area, Phase-2, New Delhi-110020 through its Chairman/ Managing Director.
3. Gopal Telecom Opp. Govt. Boys School Main Bazar Moonak District Sangrur through its Proprietor.   

                                              ….Opposite parties.

 

FOR THE COMPLAINANT   :                   Shri Sandip Goyal Advocate.                      

 

FOR THE  OPP. PARTIES    :                    Exparte.

 

Quorum

         

                    Sukhpal Singh Gill, President

Sarita Garg, Member

 

ORDER:  

 

Sukhpal Singh Gill, President

 

1.             Jagtar Singh complainant has preferred the present complaint against the opposite parties (referred to as OPs in short) on the ground that he purchased  one mobile phone of Intex Aqua Star 2 HD ( white )  on 30.06.2015 from the OP No.1 vide invoice number 3890 for  an amount of Rs.6600/- .The mobile set in question started giving  some problems  for which the complainant approached the OP No.3 who kept the mobile set and  returned  the same to the complainant after some days.  But the complainant noticed that new touch  of the mobile set was of golden colour  but the touch of original set  before repair was of white colour.  The complainant approached the OP No.3 to change the touch  but they told that there is no touch of while colour  in stock and ultimately the  OPs told that the mobile set is out of warranty and he has to pay for it. Thus, alleging deficiency in service on the part of OPs, the complainant has sought following reliefs:-

 

i)      OPs be directed to pay Rs.6600/-  with interest or give new mobile phone,

ii)     OPs be directed to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs.10000/- as compensation   on account of mental agony, harassment,

iii)   OPs be directed to pay Rs.10000/- as litigation expenses.

2.             Notices were sent to the OPs but despite service the OPs did not appear and as such OPs were proceeded exparte. 

3.             The complainant in his evidence has tendered documents Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-3 and closed evidence.

4.             After perusal of the documents placed on record and heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the complainant, we find that the only grievance of the complainant in this case  is that the OP No.3 kept his defective mobile set  with it for repair and same was returned to  him after repair.  But the complainant observed that  new touch of the mobile set was golden colour whereas the  touch of his defective mobile set was of white colour.  The complainant has produced on record bill dated 30.06.2015 Ex.C-1 for purchase of the mobile set in question. He also produced on record  copy of job sheet dated 21.04.2016 Ex.C-2 issued by the OP No.3. The said job sheet substantiates the version of the complainant regarding defective touch within the warranty period. The OPs have not come forward to contest the case of the complainant rather they chosen to remain exparte. As such the evidence produced by the complainant has gone unrebutted.

5.             In view of the above discussion, we feel that the complainant is only entitled to get replaced the  touch of the mobile set in question  with white colour. Accordingly, we partly allow the complaint of `the complainant and direct the OPs who are jointly and severally liable to replace the golden touch of the mobile set in question of the complainant with new one of white colour. We further  direct the OPs to pay an amount of Rs.2000/- being compensation on account of mental pain agony and litigation expenses.

6.             This order of ours shall be complied with  within 30 days from  the receipt of copy of the order.  Copy of the order be supplied to the parties free of charge. File be consigned to records in due course.                   Announced

                November 09, 2016

 

 

 

      ( Sarita Garg)                                    (Sukhpal Singh Gill)                                                                                                                                                                                                  Member                                            President

 

 

 

BBS/-