DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, NORTH-WEST
GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI
CSC-BLOCK-C, POCKET-C, SHALIMAR BAGH, DELHI-110088.
CC No: 766/2016
D.No.__________________ Date: ________________
IN THE MATTER OF:
MOHIT S/o LATE SH. KANHIYA LAL,
R/o 135, 2ND FLOOR, POCKET C-6,
SEC-5, ROHINI, DELHI-110085. … COMPLAINANT
Versus
1.KAPILA COMMUNICATION,
D-914-915, MANGOL PURI,
NEAR POLICE STATION,
OPP-MLA CONGRESS OFFICE,
NEW DELHI-110083.
2. SSG TRADEX PVT. LTD.,
C/o DTDC COURIER & CARGO LTD.,
KHASRA No. 1226, RAJOKRI VILLAGE
NEW DELHI-110038.
3. BGM TELECOMMUNICATION PVT. LTD.,
49/63, SITE IV, SAHIBABAD INDL. AREA,
GHAZIABAD-201010 (U.P.). … OPPOSITE PARTY(IES)
CORAM :SH. M.K. GUPTA, PRESIDENT
SH. BARIQ AHMED, MEMBER
MS. USHA KHANNA, MEMBER
Date of Institution: 27.07.2016
Date of decision:09.07.2018
MS. USHA KHANNA, MEMBER
ORDER
1. The complainant has filed the present complaint against the OPs
CC No. 766/2016 Page 1 of 6
under Section 12 & 14 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 therebyalleging that the complainant booked a mobile handset Konnect 4 NEO online at home on 14.07.2016 from Naaptol and OP gave an order no. 24655110. On 14.07.2016, one courier boy came at the premises of the complainant from OP-2 and delivered a mobile handset bearing IMEI no. 911430953434203 & 911430953664205 and the complainant paid Rs.3,398/- for it against invoice no. 847753/DL/0063106/2016-2017 on 14.07.2016. The complainant further alleged that the complainant was shocked when at the time of opening of box the complainant found that the SIM 2 slot not working properly and the memory of mobile has 138 MB instead of 8 GB and after that the complainant contacted to OP-1 on 16.07.2016 and requested to OP to replace the mobile handset and give DOA.The official of OP-1 gave a work order no. DHL-DHL-KC-365. Thereafter, the complainant approached Naaptol for replacement of mobile handset with 8 GB memory but the official of Naaptol misbehaved and abused with the complainant and the complainant approached OP-3 for replacement of mobile handset but the official of OP-3 did not respond properly and also put the call on hold for 2-3 hours. The complainant further alleged that the complainant visited at the office of OP-1 and requested to replace the mobile handset but all the requests of the complainant
CC No. 766/2016 Page 2 of 6
were fallen in deaf years and the complainant had also many times contacted and requested to the manager of the OPs through telephone but of no avail. The complainant further alleged that the complainant has also many times contacted and requested to the manager of OP-3 through telephone no. 09220007777 and also contacted at 08793038038 (Mr. ManjulPuri) and OP-3 put on hold the call and OP-3 kept on avoiding the matter on one pretext or the other and the complainant further alleged that the complainant has suffered a loss and there is deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of OPs.
2. On these allegations the complainant has filed the complaint praying for direction to OPs to refund the invoice amount i.e. Rs.3,398/- with interest towards the purchase of the said mobile handset as well as compensation of Rs.50,000/- for causing him mental pain, agony and harassment and has also sought Rs.1,100/- towards cost of litigation.
3. Noticeswere issued to Opposite Parties through speed post for appearance on 21.09.2016 and the notices were delivered on OP-1 on 16.08.2016, OP-2 on 17.08.2016& OP-3on 16.08.2016 as per track reports but none for OP-2 & OP-3 appeared on 21.09.2016 and as such OP-2 & OP-3 proceeded ex-parte and none for OP-1 appeared on 21.09.2016, 28.11.2016, 13.02.2017, 06.07.2017 &
CC No. 766/2016 Page 3 of 6
27.09.2017 and as such OP-1 was also proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 27.09.2017.
4. In order to prove his case the complainant filed his affidavit in evidence and also filed written arguments. The complainant has also placed on record copy of invoice vide no. 847753/DL/ 0063106/2016-2017 dated 14.07.2016 for an amount of Rs.3,398/- issued by Naaptol and copy of job sheet dated 16.07.2016 issued by OP-1.
5. This forum has considered the case of the complainant in the light of evidence and documents placed on record by the complainant.The case of the complainant has remainedconsistent and undoubted. The complainant has made so many complaints on telephone and also personally visited & requested to OP-1 & OP-3 but OP-1 & OP-3 not replaced the mobile handset nor refunded the amount of the mobile handset which proves the deficiency in service on the part of OP-1 & OP-3. There is nothing on record to disbelieve the case of the complainant. Moreover, it appears that even after receiving notice ofthis case from this forum, the OPs have kept mum and have not bothered to answer the case of the complainant. It also shows that OP-1 & OP-3 have no defence at all.
6. On perusal of the record, we find that the complainant made complaint of his mobile handset toOP-1 within warranty period and
CC No. 766/2016 Page 4 of 6
strangely the SIM 2 slot not working properly. It was the duty of the OP-1 & OP-3 to rectify thedefect once for all or to replace the product. A customer/consumer is not expected to file complaint frequently in respect of new product purchased. It is expected that the new product purchased is free from all sorts of defect in the product. We accordingly hold OP-1 & OP-3 are guilty of unfair trade practice and deficiency in service.
7. Accordingly, OP-1 & OP-3 jointly or severally are directed as under:
i) To pay to the complainant an amount of Rs.3,398/- being the cost of the mobile handset on return of the dispute mobile handset, accessories & original bill to OP-1 & OP-3.
ii) To pay to the complainant an amount of Rs.5,000/- as compensation towards mental agony and harassment caused to the complainant which includes cost of litigation.
8. The above amount shall be paid by OP-1& OP-3 to the complainant within 30 days from the date of receiving copy of this order failing which OP-1 & OP-3 shall be liable to pay interest on the entire awarded amount @ 10% perannum from the date of receiving copy of this order till the date of payment. If OP-1 & OP-3 fail to comply the order within 30 days from the date of receiving copy of this order, thecomplainant may approach this Forum u/s 25 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
CC No. 766/2016 Page 5 of 6
9. Let a copy of this order be sent to each party free of cost as per regulation 21 of the Consumer Protection Regulations, 2005. Thereafter file be consigned to record room.
Announced on this 9th day of July, 2018.
BARIQ AHMED USHA KHANNA M.K. GUPTA
(MEMBER) (MEMBER) (PRESIDENT)
CC No. 766/2016 Page 6 of 6
