DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-I, LUCKNOW

CASE No.461 of 2014

Sri Sanjeev Kumar Verma,

S/o Sri Sant Ram Verma,

R/o H.No.13, Mohalla Salamigarhi,

Kakori, District- Lucknow.

                                                                   ……Complainant

Versus

1. Manager,

Karbonn Mobiles,

     Head Office- 39/13,

     Off 7^th Main Hall, 2^nd Stage,

     Appareddy Palya, Indira Nagar,

     Banglore- 560038.

2. Aakarsh Electronics,

City Point 3, Way Road,

Opp. Krishi Bhawan,

Lucknow.

Through its Proprietor.

3. Dreamz Communications,

G-10, Sri Ram Tower,

13, Ashok Marg, Lucknow-226001.

                                                                              .......Opp. Parties

Present:-

Sri Vijai Varma, President.

Smt. Anju Awasthy, Member.

JUDGMENT

This complaint is filed by the Complainant against the OPs for providing the new handset in place of the old one and for payment of compensation of Rs.90,000.00.

          The case in brief of the Complainant is that he purchased a carbon mobile set from Dreamz Communications on 24.07.2013. As the mobile set was not working properly, hence he went to the service centre where he was told that the LCD was not working and if he pays Rs.1,135.00 then his LCD would be changed and after charging the amount of Rs.1,135.00 his mobile was repaired after 3 months during the

-2-

validity of the warranty period of 24.07.1013 to 24.07.2014, hence after giving legal notice to the OPs for the deficiency in service this complaint has been filed for the compensation etc.

          Notices were issued to the OPs but none appeared, hence the case proceeded exparte against OP No.1 and 2 vide orders passed on 23.09.2014 and against OP No.3 vide orders passed on 09.07.2015.

          The Complainant has filed his affidavit with 4 annexures.

          The Complainant has filed written arguments. Perused the entire record.

          In this case, the Complainant had purchased a mobile set from OP No.3 which was manufactured by OP No.1. As the set was a defective one, hence during the period of validity of the warranty period the Complainant gave it to the OP No.2 for repairs but they charged Rs.1,135.00 for repairing the set and that too after 3 months. The Complainant has filed a photocopy of the purchase invoice which is annexure 1 filed with the affidavit of the Complainant which shows that the Complainant had purchased the carbon mobile set on 24.07.2013 for a sum of Rs.3,800.00. He has also filed the photocopy of the repairing charges of Rs.1,135.00 paid by him to the OPs as is evident from annexure 2. He has also filed the copy of the legal notice sent to the OP No.1 which shows that the Complainant’s mobile set became defective and that it was repaired after taking charges on him wherein warranty period is written. The Complainant has also filed an affidavit in support of all the contents of the complaint. Notices were issued to the OPs but neither any WS filed nor any counter affidavit filed, therefore there is no reason to disbelieve the unchallenged testimony of the Complainant. Thus, from the evidence on record i.e. the affidavit of the Complainant and the documents filed by him, it is clear that the Complainant’s mobile set became defective during the period of the warranty

-3-

but the OP No.2 took repairing charges from him. It also transpires that the service centre took about 3 months time to repair the mobile set, therefore obviously the OP No.2 has committed deficiency in service and since OP No.2 is the authorised service centre of OP No.1, therefore the OP No.1 is also responsible for the deficiency in service. OP No.3 is the dealer, therefore OP No.3 is not liable for any deficiency in service. The Complainant therefore is entitled to get refund of Rs.1,135.00 from OP No.1 and 2 with interest and as he has also been harassed in this regard, therefore he is also entitled to compensation as also cost of the litigation.

ORDER

          The complaint is partly allowed. The OP No.1 and 2 are jointly and severally directed to pay Rs.1,135.00 (Rupees One Thousand One Hundred Thirty Five Only) with 9% interest from the date of filing of the case till the final payment is made to the Complainant.

The OP No.1 and 2 are also directed to pay Rs.2,000.00 (Rupees Two Thousand Only) as compensation and Rs.2,000.00 (Rupees Two Thousand Only) as cost of the litigation to the Complainant.

The compliance of the order is to be made within a month.

         (Anju Awasthy)                                      (Vijai Varma)

                Member                                              President                              

 Dated:   12  January, 2016