DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BHIWANI.

   CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO.412 of 13

                                           DATE OF INSTITUTION: - 2.9.2013

                                                     DATE OF ORDER: -3-6-2015

Nitin Goel son of Shi Surender Goel, resident of Bhiwani, tehsil and district Bhiwani

    ……………Complainant.

VERSUS

1. Jeenu Mobile Gallery, Shop No.52, Adarsh Govt. College Market, Hansi Gate, Bhiwani.
2. Malik Communication, Samsung Mobile Centre, Shop No.1, Ganpatrai Hospital, Ghantaghar, Bhiwani.
3. General Manager, Samsung India Electronics Ltd. Tower-C, 2^nd Floor, Vipul Tech. Square, Sector-43, Gurgaon.

………….. Opposite Parties.

COMPLAINT U/S 12 OF CONSUMER PROECTION ACT

BEFORE: -    Shri Rajesh Jindal, President

  Shri Balraj Singh, Member

  Smt. Anita Sheoran, Member

Present:- Complainant in person.

       OP No.1 ex parte.

       Shri R.N.Rohilla, Advocate for Ops No.2 & 3.

ORDER:-

Rajesh Jindal, President:

          In brief, the grievance of the complainant is that he had purchased one Handset of Samsung Company for a sum of Rs.15500/- from respondent No.1. It is alleged that soon after purchase the Hand Set became defective within warranty period and complaint was lodged with the respondents. The complainant visited the service centre of respondent company several times and requested to repair the same but it flatly refused to do the needful. Hence the complainant was deprived of use of the Hand Set and suffered a loss. Now the complainant has claimed the replacement of the Hand Set along with compensation and costs by way of filing present complainant.

2.                Respondent No.1 has failed to come present despite service. Hence, he was proceeded against ex parte by this Forum vide order dated 20.12.2013.

3.                  Opposite parties No.2 & 3 have filed reply stating, inter-alia, therein that the complainant approached the service centre of the company on 24.12.2013 after filing of the complaint and on the same day charger of the Hand set was replaced. It is submitted that the complainant never reported any problem regarding the Hand Set and external accessories were changed after filing of the present complaint. It is further submitted that the complainant has not produced any expert opinion which prove that the Mobile Set was not working properly. Therefore, there is no deficiency in service on the part of answering opposite parties. It is prayed that the complaint be dismissed with costs.

4.                 In order to make out his case, the complainant has placed on record Annexure “A” Photostat copy of Bill dated 10.5.2013, Annexure “B” Photostat copy of Job Sheet along with affidavit CW1/A dated 7.4.2015.

5.                In reply thereto, the opposite parties have placed on record Annexure “R1” Case Summary along with affidavit of Shri Somya Sawreoop dated 23^rd May, 2014.

6.                 We have gone through the record of the case carefully and have heard the complainant in person as well as learned counsel for the parties.

7.                 Learned counsel for the complainant reiterated the contents of the complaint.

8.                Learned counsels for Ops No.2 & 3 reiterated the contents of the reply.

9.                 In the light of the pleadings and arguments of the parties we have examined the relevant material on record and observed that the Mobile Hand Set supplied by the Ops was not working properly. Accordingly to Annexure R1 produced by Ops No.2 & 3 was having a defect within warranty period and the complainant has reported about defect in the Mobile Hand Set to the Ops. The complainant has referred Annexure “A” photo stat copy of bill dated 10.5.2015 for Rs.15500/- in respect of the Mobile Hand Set in question which has been issued by OP No.1, from whom the complainant has purchased the Mobile Hand Set in question. Undoubtedly, the Mobile Hand Set in question is defective as observed by us.  Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case we allow the complaint of the complainant and hold that the Ops are liable to refund the cost of the Mobile Hand Set to the complainant. The complainant shall return the old Mobile Hand Set to OP No.1 against proper receipt and the Ops are directed to pay Rs.15500/- to the complainant within fifteen days from the deposit of Old Mobile Set with OP No.1. This order be complied with by the Ops within 30 days from the date of passing of this order, failing which the Ops shall also liable to pay Rs.1000/- as costs to the complainant.

          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: 3.6.2015.                                                      (Rajesh Jindal)

                                                                                       President,      

                                                                           District Consumer Disputes

                                                                           Redressal Forum, Bhiwani.

(Anita Sheoran),            (Balraj Singh),       

Member.                                 Member.