CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM – X

GOVERNMENT OF N.C.T. OF DELHI

Udyog Sadan, C – 22 & 23, Institutional Area

(Behin Qutub Hotel)

New Delhi – 110 016

Case No.175/2014

SH. MANISH KUMAR

S/O SH. RAJENDER PRASAD

R/O C-IIND/11 MADANGIR,

NEW DELHI-110062

                                                            …………. COMPLAINANT                                                                                           

                                                Vs.

M/S KARBONN MOBILES

D-170, OKHLA INDUSTRIAL AREA,

PHASE-I, NEW DELHI-110020

THROUGH ITS BRANCH MANAGER

AUTHORISED REPRSENTATIVE

                                                …………..RESPONDENT

                                                                                    Date of Order: 30.11.2015

O R D E R

A.S. Yadav – President

The case of the complainant is that he purchased a mobile phone on 19.7.2013 from OP.  However the said mobile phone did not function properly since the day of its purchase.  The complainant visited the service centre of OP on 03.03.2014 and submitted the mobile phone for repairing.  However till date despite number of requests made by the complaint through email, OP neither has repaired the mobile phone nor returned the same.  Finally, the complainant was constrained to send legal notice dated 28.03.2014 but inspite of that the mobile phone was not returned.

It is prayed that OP be directed to replace the mobile phone or refund the cost of mobile phone alongwith interest and also to pay Rs.80,000/- as compensation and Rs.20,000/- for litigation cost.

OP did not file written statement and was finally proceeded ex-parte on 16.02.2015.  The matter was listed for final arguments on 20.11.2015.  On that day counsel for OP submitted that OP is ready to replace the mobile phone with a latest version of the mobile phone but the same was not agreeable to the complainant.  Complainant stated that earlier he was ready to settle the matter with OP in August 2014 but OP did not agree. 

We have heard complainant and Ld. counsel for OP and carefully perused the record.

It is proved form the statement of the complainant that he purchased the mobile phone on 19.7.2013 from OP for a sum of Rs.5,920/-.  It is proved that the mobile phone was handed over to OP vide job card dated 03.03.2014 for repair.  It is proved form the statement of the complainant that neither the mobile phone has been repaired nor the same has been returned.  Complainant has also proved the email received from OP whereby OP has assured to resolve the problem but till date nothing has been done.  It is proved form the unrebutted statement of the complainant that there is deficiency in service on the part of OP.  In fact OP has agreed to replace the mobile phone. 

OP is directed to refund a sum of Rs.5,920/- alongwith 10% interest p.a. from April 2014 and also to pay Rs.2,000/- as compensation and Rs.2,000/- towards litigation expenses.

Let the order be complied with within one month of the receipt thereof.  The complaint stands disposed of accordingly.

Copy of order be sent to the parties, free of cost, and thereafter file be consigned to record room.

          (D.R. TAMTA)                                                                     (A.S. YADAV)

            MEMBER                                                                             PRESIDENT