IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ALAPPUZHA
Thursday, the 28th day of September, 2017.
Filed on 19..12..2016
Present
- Smt. Elizabeth George (President)
- Sri. Antony Xavier(Member)
- Smt. Jasmine D (Member)
IN
CC/No.407/2016
Between
Complainant: Opposite party:-
Sri. Steephen Joseph 1. LYF Mobile Reliance Retail Ltd
S/o Joseph Shed No.77/80.
Valliyara Indian Corparation Godown
Thathampally Mankoil Naka, Vill-Dapode
Avalukkunnu.P.O Tal Bhiwandi, Dist- Tane
Alappuzha-688 006 Maharashtra-421 302
2. Reliance Retail Limited
5,TTc Lndl Area, Thane Belapur Road
Ghansoil, Navi Mumbai- 400 701
3. Area Manager
LYF Service Centre, 1st floor
Alleppey Arcade, Cullen Road
Mullackal Junction,
Alappuzha- 688 011
4. Proprietor
Shop Mobile Hut
Guruvayoor Road, Kunnamkulam Thrissur.
O R D E R
SMT.JASMINE.D. (MEMBER)
The case of the complainant in short is as follows:-
The complainant had purchased a mobile phone from the 4th opposite party manufactured by the 1st opposite party for an amount of Rs. 20,000/- on 10-7-2016. The opposite parties have assured 1 year warranty for the product. The complainant noticed various defects in the phone within one month from the date of purchase. The complainant immediately intimated the 4th opposite party about the defects of the phone and later as per their direction the complainant informed the 2nd opposite party regarding the defects. 2nd opposite party informed the complainant that it is only a soft ware issue and directed the complainant to download a new
software. But the defects persisted. The complainant had send several e-mail to the 2nd opposite party regarding the defects but they did not bring any resolution to the problem. On 8/12/2016 the complainant entrusted the phone to the 3rd opposite party but they could not rectify the defect. The complainant requested the opposite parties either to replace the phone or to rectify the defects of the phone. But the opposite parties failed to do so. The complainant sustained much mental agony and hence filed this complaint.
2. Notice was issued to the opposite parties. Opposite parties 1-3 appeared before the Forum and filed version. Notice against the 4th opposite party was not returned.
3. The version of the opposite parties 1-3 are as follows:-
The complaint is not maintainable. It is true that the product has 1 year warranty. The complainant did not reported any problem other than ‘heating’ and to resolve the issue 3rd opposite party updated the software of the product and after updating the software the product has been functioning normally and which was demonstrated to the complainant. The complainant has not brought on record the reference no of the complaint reported with opposite party No.2. The complainant on 3/1/2017 approached opposite party No.3 and reported the problem of hanging and after updating a software the product has been functioning normally. The opposite parties have provided proper after sale service to the complainant and hence the complaint may be dismissed.
3. Complainant was examined as PW1 and documents Ext.A1 to Ext.A4 were marked. An Expert Commissioner was also appointed in this case he inspected the phone and filed reported and it was marked as Ext.C1.
4. Considering allegation of the complainant and contention of the opposite parties the Forum has raised the following issues for consideration:-
- Whether there is any deficiency in the service of the Opposite Parties?
- Whether the complainant is entitled to get the relief and cost?
5. Issues:-1and 2
The case of the complainant is that the complainant had purchased a mobile phone but immediately after the date of purchase the product shows defect one after the other. Even though the defect was intimated to the opposite parties they had not rectified the defect properly. According to the complainant he could not enjoy many specifications as assured by the manufacturer. The complainant purchased such as expensive phone to enjoy all the facilitates as assured by the opposite parties. Hence filed this complaint.
The complainant was examined as PW1 and documents Exts.A1-A3 were marked. An expert commissioner was appointed by the Forum and his report was marked as Ext.C1. Admittedly the product was purchased on 10-7-2016 and the Ext.A2 shows that the product became defective on 12-9-2016. ie. immediately after 2 months from the date of purchase. Ext.A3 series are the copies of e-mail. Which shows that the complainant has sent several e-mails to the proper authority concerning the matter but According to the complainant there was no use of the mails and the opposite party did not bring any resolution to the problem? Ext.A4
is Job sheet which shows that the complainant entrusted the phone on 3/1/2017 to the 3rd opposite party. According to the complainant immediately after the purchase the phone remained defective it hanged several times and automatically switched off. The product became defective during the warranty period. Ext.C1 report would shows that the mobile phone is defective. The complainant purchased such an expensive phone on the basis of the assurance given by the opposite parties. The complainant could not use all the major functions properly as assured by the opposite parties. Even though the defect was intimated to the opposite parties they have not made any earnest effort to resolve the grievance of the complainant. Since the opposite parties failed to rectify the defect and that too arose within the warranty period they have committed deficiency in service and the complainant is entitled to get the relief. The opposite parties are jointly and severally liable for the same.
In the result the complaint is allowed the opposite parties 1-3 are directed to replace the disputed phone with new one of the same model/price. Opposite parties are further directed to pay an amount of Rs. 2000/-(Rupees Two thousand only) towards compensation. Order shall be complied within one month from the date of the receipt of this order, failing which the order opposite parties are directed to refund the price of the mobile phone for Rs. 20,000/- to the complainant with 9% interest on date of order till realization.
Dictated to the Confidential Asst. transcribed by him corrected by me and pronounced in open Forum on this the 28th day of September, 2017.
Sd/- Smt. Jasmine D (Member)
Sd/-Smt.Elizabeth George (President)
Sd/-Sri. Antony Xavier (Member)
APPENDIX:
Evidence of the Complainant:
PW1 - Steephen Jospeh(Witness)
Ext.C1 - Commission Report.
Ext.A1 - Copy of Retail invoice dtd. 10. 7. 2016.
Ext.A2 - Customer information slip
Ext.A3 - Copy of e-mail conversation
Ext.A4 - Copy of voice call recrod
Evidence of the opposite party: Nil
// True Copy //
By Order
Senior Superintendent
To
Complainant/Opposite party/SF
Typed by: Br/-
Comprd by:-
