BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ERNAKULAM.

 Date of filing :  01.08.2017

                                                                                              Date of Order : 10.01.2018

PRESENT:

 Shri. Cherian K. Kuriakose,                                   President

 Shri. Sheen Jose,                                                 Member  
 Smt. Beena Kumari V.K.                              Member.

                            CC.No.305/2017

                                   Between

O R D E R

Beena Kumari V.K.   Member 

1. A brief statement of facts of this complaint is as stated below:

         This complaint is filed by the complainant alleging deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties.  The complainant had purchased a Lenovo vibe K5 NOTE mobile phone from flipkart on 06.05.2017 and within a short span of time ie., on 4^th July 2017the mother board of the phone became defective and the phone was entrusted with the 2^nd opposite party, authorized service centre of Lenovo and the 2^nd opposite party asked for 15 days’ time for the replacement of the mother board and the complainant was asked to take delivery of the repaired phone on 18.07.2017.  But the phone was not ready as on 18.07.2017.  The complainant contacted again on 21.07.2017.  But the repaired phone was not delivered to him and the phone was returned after repair, on 24.07.2017.  But on 25.07.2017 the volume of the phone was much reduced and the power button was not working.  Again on26.07.2017 Wifi of the phone was entrusted with the 2^nd opposite party for repair.  The 2^nd opposite party informed that the mother board was showing complaints and they asked for 2 days’ time to repair the mobile phone. The complainant within 2 months of purchase of the phone, had to approach the 2^nd opposite party several times for getting repaired the phone and on each occasion the complainant demanded for the replacement of the phone but it was not done.  It is submitted that even after servicing the complaints of the phone still continues.  Hence this complaint is filed seeking directions of this Forum to the opposite parties to replace the subject mobile phone with a new one of the same make and specifications   or to a higher configuration or to refund the price of the mobile phone, to pay Rs.75,000/- as compensation for the mental agony and inconvenience caused to the complainant along with costs of the proceedings.

2)     Notices were issued to the opposite parties from this Forum and the notices were served on the 1^st and 2^nd opposite party on 07.08.2017.  But there was no response for both the opposite parties. Therefore, the opposite parties were set ex-parte.

3)     The issues to be decided in this case are as follows:

(i)      Whether the complainant has proved deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties?

(ii)      If so, whether the complainant is entitled get replacement of the mobile phone with a new one or to get refund of the price of the mobile phone?

(iii)     Whether the opposite parties are liable to pay compensation of Rs. 75,000/- for the mental agony or inconvenience if any, suffered by the complainant along with costs of the proceedings?

4)       The evidence in this case consisted of the ex-parte proof affidavit filed by the complainant and the documentary evidences furnished by the complainant which were marked as Exbt. A1 to A5 and A6 series.  Mo1 CD was also marked on the side of the complainant.

5)       Issue No. (i) and (ii)

          The complainant Sri.Able Jacob Kurian had purchased a Lenovo Vibe KS Note (gray 64GB) mobile phone valued Rs,.12,999/- as evidenced by Exbt.A1 invoice dated 06.05.2017.  Within 2 months of the above purchase ie., on 04.07.2017 the mother board of the mobile phone became defective and the complainant entrusted the mobile phone with the 2^nd opposite party for repair under warranty on 04.07.2017 as evidenced by Exbt.A2 job sheet issued by the 2^nd opposite party – Lenovo service centre M/s.Techno Craft KOC, and in the very same job sheet it is noted that the mobile phone was repaired on 22.07.2017 and the complainant had taken delivery of the repaired mobile phone on 24.07.2017.  We find that there was inordinate delay of 20 days in repairing the mobile phone by replacing the defective mother board.  The mobile phone became defective on the 2^nd day after taking delivery of the repaired phone ie., on 26.07.2017 the Wifi was not working as stated in the Exbt.A4 signed paper issued by the 2^nd opposite party.  Exbt.A5 Job sheet dated 27.07.2017 reveals that the mobile phone was entrusted with the 2^nd opposite party – service centre since there was no network service or connection during the warranty period itself. Exbt. A6 series (10 Nos.) are e-mails sent by the complainant on 22.07.2017, 25.07.2017, 27.07.2017, 03.08.2017, 04.08.2017, 25.08.2017, 31.08.2017, 20.10.2017 and 13.11.2017 intimating the defective service offered to the complainant about the inordinate delay in repairing the mobile phone, about the hanging problem, over vibration of the phone, about call disconnection and so on.  Thus the evidences furnished before the Forum show that the mobile phone purchased by the complainant was suffering from inherent manufacturing defect in view of the recurring defects during the warranty period and the complainant could not use the mobile phone to his satisfaction only for 2 months after the purchase. The mother board of the mobile phone became defective within 2 months and the 2^nd opposite party – authorized service centre of Lenovo took 20 days for curing the defect by replacing the mother board. But on the very next day the volume of the phone was found low and the power button was found not working and the replaced mother board of the phone was found defective.  Various defects of the mobile phone during the warranty period go to show that the mobile phone sold to the complainant was suffering from inherent manufacturing defect and we find that the complainant is entitled to get a new mobile phone of the same configuration from the 1^st opposite party- Lenovo India Pvt Ltd. or to refund of the price of Rs.12,999/-.  The 1^st and 2^nd issues are thus decided in favour of the complainant.

6)       Issue No. (iii)

          The complainant had suffered a lot of inconvenience and mental agony as a result of deficient service offered by the authorized service centre of Lenovo India Ltd.  The complainant had sent so many e-mail communications to the opposite parties informing the inherent defects of the mobile phone and about the deficient service offered during the warranty period.  Had the opposite parties replaced the defective mobile phone with a new one, when the complainant approached the opposite parties, this complaint would not have been filed by the complainant.  The complainant had also spent his valuable time and money to contest this case before this Forum.  Therefore we find that the complainant is entitled to get compensation for the inconvenience and mental agony suffered by him, we fix the compensation amount at Rs.13,000/- and the costs of the proceedings at Rs.3000/-.

          In the result the complaint is allowed in part and we direct as follows:

1. The opposite parties shall replace the defective mobile phone with a new mobile phone of the same configuration and value.  The difference in value of the new mobile phone if any, shall be adjusted by either.
2. The opposite parties shall pay Rs.13,000/- to the complainant towards compensation for the mental agony suffered by the complainant.
3. The opposite parties shall also pay Rs.3000/- towards costs to the complainant.
4. The liability of the opposite parties shall be joint and several.

          The above orders shall be complied with, within 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.  

Pronounced in the open Forum on this the 10^th day of January 2018.

                                                          Sd/-Beena Kumari, V.K., Member

Sd/- Cherian K. Kuriakose, President

                                                         Sd/-Sheen Jose,   Member

                                                                             Forwarded By Order

                                                                             Senior Superintendent

Date of Despatch:

By Post                      ::

By Hand                    ::

                                                          APPENDIX

Complainants Exhibits

Opposite party's Exhibits:          Nil

                                         …................