BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, LUDHIANA.
Complaint No: 59 of 20.01.2016. Date of Decision: 04.07.2016.
Amit Kumar S/o. B.P. Pandey, R/o.1622/5, Street No.4, Quality Chowk, Dushera Ground Road, New Shimlapuri, Ludhiana.
..… Complainant
Versus
- Karbon Mobile Authorized Service Centre through Friends Telecom, 5024, Baba Than Singh Chowk, Opp. Vodafone Store, Samrala Road, Ludhiana.
- Karbon Mobiles through its authorized Signatory H.Q. D-170, Okhla, Industrial Area, Phase-I, Noida city, New Delhi.
…..Opposite parties
Complaint under the Provisions of Consumer Protection Act, 1986
QUORUM:
SH. G.K. DHIR, PRESIDENT
MS. BABITA, MEMBER
COUNSEL FOR THE PARTIES:
For complainant : In person
For Ops : Exparte.
ORDER
PER G.K. Dhir, PRESIDENT
1. Complaint under Section 12 of The Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (herein-after in short to be referred as ‘Act’) filed by complainant by claiming that he purchased one handset mobile of Karbonn model no.K160 IEMI No.(1) 911432705873860 (2) 911432705873878 from M/s. Patel Mobile Care, Kalsian Street, Near Dhuri Line, Miller Ganj, Ludhiana, who is dealer of OP No.2. On 11.12.2015, this mobile was purchased for consideration of Rs.900/- vide invoice bearing No.758. After lapse of 4/5 days, keypad of the mobile stood hampered owing to hanging. Battery backup was for 10 minutes sometimes even after full charge. Complainant approached OP1, the authorized service centre of OP2 for disclosing about the problem in the mobile. That service centre called upon complainant to deposit mobile with assurance that D.O. will be prepared after 2-3 days. Complainant was called upon to contact for further information the service centre through its landline No.0161-5097900. Complainant deposited the mobile including data cable, charger etc. with service centre and the same is lying with said service centre till date. After 2/3 days, the complainant contacted on phone the service centre and got reply as if approval regarding D.O. has not been received from head office till that time. Thereafter, complainant again contacted service centre after 2 days, but reply again received as if approval is pending with the head office and complainant can call on toll free No.18602004660 for getting further information. After fortnight, complainant gave a telephonic call on the above said toll free number, but has not got satisfactory reply. OP disclosed that problem will be solved within 15 days. Defects in the mobile have not been rectified, but the matter is procrastinated and that is why by pleading deficiency in service, this complaint filed for directions to Ops to pay damages of Rs.10,000/-.
2. Notice of complaint issued to Ops. OP1 served through Munadi, but none appeared for him and that is why he was proceeded against exparte vide orders dated 13.05.2016. Summons sent to OP2 through registered post were not received back served or unserved and as such, OP2 was proceeded against exparte vide orders dated 21.03.2016 by drawing presumption of due service.
3. Complainant in exparte evidence, tendered his affidavit Ex. CA along with documents Ex. C1 to Ex. C4 and then closed his evidence.
4. Written arguments not submitted by complainant, but oral arguments heard. Record gone through carefully.
5. Invoice Ex. C1 has been produced to show that the complainant purchased the mobile set in question from M/s. Patel Mobile Care, Kalsian Street, Near Dhuri Line, Miller Ganj, Ludhiana. In view of this purchase, complainant has cause of action for filing this complaint within territorial jurisdiction of this Forum.
6. Service job sheet Ex. C2 of dated 15.12.2015 produced to show that said mobile set was deposited with service centre for curing the problem of keypad hanging and of battery backup of 10 minutes even after full charging. That mobile set has not been returned to complainant despite correspondence conducted by him through email is a fact borne from contents of the email print sheet Ex. C4. As the defective mobile set not returned to complainant after repair despite his repeated visits to service centre and as such, certainly there is deficiency in service on the part of Ops. Complainant has suffered mentally due to deliberate deficiency in service on the part of Ops and as such, complainant is entitled for refund of price amount of Rs.900/- along with compensation for mental harassment and litigation expenses.
7. As a sequel of above discussion, complaint allowed exparte by directing Ops to refund price amount of Rs.900/- (Rupees Nine Hundred only) within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of order. Compensation for mental harassment of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees Two Thousand only) and litigation expenses of Rs.1,000/- (Rupees One Thousand only) more allowed in favour of complainant and against Ops. Payment of these amounts be also made within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of order. Copies of order be supplied to parties free of costs as per rules. File be indexed and consigned to record room.
(Babita) (G.K. Dhir)
Member President
Announced in Open Forum.
Dated:04.07.2016.
Gobind Ram.
