Punjab

Sangrur

CC/345/2016

Vimarsh Garg - Complainant(s)

Versus

Lava International Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Smt. Anjana Jindal

23 Sep 2016

ORDER

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SANGRUR

                             

                                                                  Complaint no. 345                                                                                         

                                                                  Instituted on:   01.04.2016             

                                                                   Decided on:    23.09.2016

 

Vimarsh Garg son of Parveet Garg c/o Garg Welding Store, Mehlan Road, Near Dashmesh Kanda, Sangrur.    

                                                …. Complainant

                                Versus

 

1.      Lava International Limited, A-56, Sector 64, Noida (201-301) through its Chairman/ Managing Director.

2.    Managing Director of Lava International Limited Khasra No.211, Royal Countries, Shani Bazar Road, Rajkri, New Delhi.

3.   Lava International Limited, Khasra No.211, Royal Countries Shani Bazar Road, Rajokri, New Delhi through its Manager.

4.     Binni Telecom, Court Road, Opp. Post Office, Xolo Service Centre, Sangrur through its Manager/ Executive.

                                              ….Opposite parties.

 

 

 

FOR THE COMPLAINANT      :     Ms. Anjana Jindal,  Advocate                          

 

FOR THE   OPP. PARTIES      :      Shri Sandip Goyal,  Advocate                         

 

Quorum

         

                    Sukhpal Singh Gill, President

K.C.Sharma, Member

Sarita Garg, Member

     

 

ORDER:  

 

Sukhpal Singh Gill, President

 

1.             Vimarsh Garg, complainant has preferred the present complaint against the opposite parties (referred to as OPs in short) on the ground that he online purchased a XOLO Era HD Rocky Grey from OP No.3 for Rs.4,777/- on 20.11.2015 under one year warranty.   In the month of February  2016,  the mobile set in question started creating audio problem for which the complainant approached the OP No.4 who after inspection found  that the receiver of the mobile set was cracking. The defect was rectified. Thereafter complainant  again approached the OP no.4 for same defect on 16.03.2016 and 20.03.2016 and again the mobile phone in question was returned to him in working condition.  But now again after two or three days the mobile set started to cause problem  and the OP has flatly refused to pay any heed to the complaint of the complainant. Thus, alleging deficiency in service on the part of OPs, the complainant has sought following reliefs:-

i)      OPs be directed to refund Rs.4777/-  as price of the cell phone,

ii)     OPs be directed to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs.25000/- as compensation   on account of mental agony, harassment,

iii)   OPs be directed to pay Rs.11000/- as litigation expenses.

2.             In reply filed by OPs, legal objections on the grounds of maintainability, suppression of material facts, locus standi and cause of action have been taken up. On merits,  it has been denied that  on 20.11.2015  the complainant purchased  the said mobile from the OP No.3 for an amount of Rs.4777/- .  It has also been denied that after 2-3  months from the purchase the mobile set was started to cause some audio problem.  It is denied that the complainant ever reported the matter to OP no.4. It is also denied that there is any manufacturing defect in the mobile set. Thus, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the Ops.

3.             The complainant in his evidence has tendered documents Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-4 and closed evidence. On the other hand, OPs have tendered an affidavit  Ex.OP-1 and closed evidence.

 

 

 

4.             From the perusal of the written reply filed by the Ops we find that the OPs have totally denied all the allegations leveled by the complainant. Even the purchase of the mobile set in dispute by the complainant from any  of the OPs is also denied.  But,  from the perusal of the entire documents placed on the file  by both the parties, we further find that the complainant has produced on record retail/ tax invoice/cash memorandum Ex.C-1 wherein  it has been mentioned that  the product i.e. mobile set in dispute had been sold by  Lava International Limited Khasra No.211, Royal Contries, Shani Bazar Road Rajokri New Delhi online to the complainant on his billing address/ shipping address  Vimarsh Garg, Garg Welding Store, Mehlan Road Near Dashmesh Kanda Sangrur.  Further, the complainant has produced on  the file  job sheet dated 11.02.2016 which was issued by the OP No.4 and wherein it had been specifically mentioned that there is problem of receiver audio poor which was  rectified  by the OP no.4 . The complainant has also produced job sheet  dated 16.03.2016  wherein the problem of the mobile set is not switching on which was rectified by the OP No.4.

5.             The complainant's further grievance is that under the warranty period the mobile set in dispute had been giving continuous problems but the OPs did not pay any heed to the complaint of the complainant.

Surprisingly, we are not understand on what basis the OPs have totally denied the allegations of the complainant rather the documents produced on record by the complainant proves his version. Denial of all the allegations of the complainant shows the act and conduct of the OPs and deficiency in service.

 

6.             So, in view of the above discussion we feel that it is a well proved case of the complainant and OPs are deficient in providing the service to the complainant. Accordingly, we allow the complaint of the complainant and direct the OPs who are jointly and severally liable to pay the price amount of the mobile set in question i.e. Rs.4777/-. We further direct the OPs to  pay an amount of Rs.3000/- on account of compensation being mental pain agony and harassment and Rs.2000/- as  litigation expenses.        

 

7.             This order of ours shall be complied with  within 30 days from  the receipt of copy of the order.  Copy of the order be supplied to the parties free of charge. File be consigned to records in due course.           6      Announced

                September 23, 2016

 

 

 

        ( Sarita Garg)          ( K.C.Sharma)               (Sukhpal Singh Gill)                                                                                                                               Member                  Member                      President

 

 

 

BBS/-