Punjab

Sangrur

CC/579/2016

Subhash Chander - Complainant(s)

Versus

Karbon Mobiles - Opp.Party(s)

Shri G.S.Shergill

06 Mar 2017

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SANGRUR.

 

                                                               

                                                Complaint No.  579

                                                Instituted on:    27.09.2016

                                                Decided on:       06.03.2017

 

Subhash Chander son of Nasib Chand, resident of Village Gujjran, Tehsil Sunam, District Sangrur.

                                                        …Complainant

                                Versus

1.             Karbonn Company Limited, at D-170, Okhla, Industrial Area, Phase-I, New Delhi-110 020 through its Managing Director.

2.             Karbonn authorised service centre, Chhabra Communication, Dhuri Gate, Sangrur through its authorised signatory.

3.             Varindera Watch Company, Bus Stand Link Road, Dirba, Tehsil Sunam, District Sangrur through its proprietor/partner.

                                                        …Opposite parties

For the complainant  :               Shri G.S.Shergill, Adv.

For OP No.1&2         :               Shri Ashish Grover, Adv.

For OP No.3             :               Exparte.

 

Quorum:   Sukhpal Singh Gill, President

                Sarita Garg, Member

                Vinod Kumar Gulati, Member

 

Order by : Sukhpal Singh Gill, President.

 

1.             Shri Subhash Chander, complainant (referred to as complainant in short) has preferred the present complaint against the opposite parties (referred to as OPs in short) on the ground that the complainant purchased one mobile phone Karboon model Machone (dual sim) from the OP number 3 bearing IMEI no.911430800768860 and 911430800888866 on 3.8.2014 for Rs.7000/- vide bill number 78 dated 3.8.2015. It is further averred that at the time of its purchase, the OP number 3 gave a warranty of one year for the mobile said in question against any defects.  The grievance of the complainant is that on 28.6.2016, the complainant was shocked to see that the mobile became totally dead, as such the complainant immediately approached OP number 3, who told to approach the OP number 2, as such the complainant approached OP number 2, who kept the mobile set in question and advised to take back after 7/8 days and in this respect the OP number 2 issued job sheet number 3938 dated 28.6.2016 to the complainant.  Thereafter the complainant approached the OP number 2 to take back the mobile set duly repaired, but OP number 3 told that the said mobile set is beyond repairs, then the complainant requested the OP number 2 to replace it with a new one, but all in vain.  Thus, alleging deficiency in service on the part of the OPs the complainant has prayed that OPs be directed to refund to the complainant the price of the mobile set in question i.e. Rs.7000/- along with interest @ 18% per annum from the date of its purchase till realisation and further claimed compensation and litigation expenses.

 

2.             Record shows that OP number 3 was  proceeded exparte.

 

3.             The OPs number 1 and 2 though appeared through their counsel, but they did not file any written reply, as such the right to file written reply was closed by order of the Forum on 13.12.2016.

 

4.             The learned counsel for the complainant has produced Ex.C-1 affidavit of the complainant, Ex.C-2 copy of the bill, Ex.C-3 copy of job card and closed evidence. On the other hand, the learned counsel for OPs number 1 and 2 has not produced any evidence on record.

 

5.             We have carefully perused the complaint, version of the opposite parties and heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties. In our opinion, the complaint merits acceptance, for these reasons.

 

6.             A bare perusal of the file clearly reveals that OP number 3 did not appear despite service and choose to remain exparte.  Ex.C-2 is a copy of the bill issued by OP number 3 which clearly shows that the complainant had purchased the mobile set in question on 3.8.2015 by paying an amount of Rs.7000/-.  Ex.C-3 is the copy of job sheet whereby the mobile in question was handed over to OP number 2, which clearly shows that the mobile set in question was dead at the time of delivery to the OP number 2.  The learned counsel for the complainant has alleged that since the mobile set in question was dead, as such the complainant approached OP number 2, but the OP number 2 found that the mobile in set was not repairable, as such, the complainant requested OP number 2 to replace it with a new one, but all in vain.  Since OP number 3 is exparte and OPs number 1 and 2 did not produce any written reply and evidence, as such, we are of the considered opinion that the mobile set in question is defective one as there is nothing on record produced by the Ops to rebut the contention of the complainant.  In the circumstances of the case, we find it to be a clear cut case of deficiency in service on the part of the Ops and we further find that the ends of justice would be met if the Ops are directed to refund to the complainant the purchase price of the mobile set i.e. Rs.7000/- as the mobile set in question is already with the OP number 2.

 

7.             In view of our above discussion, we allow the complaint and direct the Ops number 1 and 2 to pay to the complainant an amount of Rs.7000/-.  The OPs number 1 and 2 are further directed to pay to the complainant an amount of Rs.3000/- on account of compensation for mental tension and litigation expenses.

 

8.             This order of ours be complied with within a period of thirty days of its communication. A copy of this order be issued to the parties free of cost. File be consigned to records.

                Pronounced.

                March 6, 2017.

                                                (Sukhpal Singh Gill)

                                                     President

                               

 

                                         (Sarita Garg)

                                                       Member

 

 

 

                                                (Vinod Kumar Gulati)

                                                        Member