In the Court of the
Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Unit -I, Kolkata,
8B, Nelie Sengupta Sarani, 4th Floor, Kolkata-700087.
CDF/Unit-I/Case No.310/2012.
1) Ashwini Kumar,
EC-203, Ground Floor, Near EC Market,
Sector-I, Salt Lake City, KOlkata-700064. ---------- Complainant
---Versus---
1) M.M. Answari,
1/1, Collin Lane, Collin Street, Kolkata-700016. ---------- Opposite Party
Present : Sri Sankar Nath Das, President.
Dr. Subir Kumar Chaudhuri, Member.
Smt. Samiksha Bhattacharya, Member
Order No. 14 Dated 26-11-2013.
The case of the complainant in short is that on 12.2.11 complainant booked the mobile handset by online for model “Blackberry Storm 2 (9520)”. But with the utter shock the item received was “Blackberry 9550”. Complainant lodged a complaint with the seller and sent back the item on his expense with request for resending the set as per order. On 3.3.11 complainant received the item back again but item box was not in proper form and the accessories were not authentic. Hence the complainant was unable to use the handset. The accessories provided to him were of LG Company instead of Blackberry. Complainant again informed the seller along with photograph by e-mail. Several correspondences were made between the seller and complainant but in vain. Then complainant visited the Blackberry Service Station to solve his problem. But after couple of weeks they returned the battery with remark “Not as per data team policy” (annex-5). Complainant made his complaint to the Director, CA & FBP Deptt., West Bengal for mediation. But neither the dealer nor the seller responded. Therefore complainant prays for refund of handset price along with courier charge, compensation and litigation cost.
Notice upon o.p. no.1 is returned with endorsement ‘refused’ which amounts to good service. Hence the matter was fixed ex parte as against o.p. no.1. Name of o.p. no.2 was expunged vide order no.9 dt.26.6.13.
Decision with reasons:
We have gone through the petition, evidence and materials on record.
It is admitted fact that complainant purchased one Blackberry 9550 handset of Rs.17,500/- from Calcutta Electronics on 12.2.11 and the order was made online. Complainant has filed tax invoice (buyers copy). Complainant has also alleged his grievance to o.p. no.1 as soon as he noticed the difference between the model he has been ordered and the model which has been sent. We have gone through the e-mail correspondences between the complainant and o.p. no.1. Finding no other alternative complainant went to service station for solving the problem in the handset. It is mentioned in the service job sheet that the battery was not working as ‘not as per data team policy’. As the complaint and the documents have not been challenged by o.p. and the same remained as unchallenged testimonies. Hence, we are in the view that complainant has substantiate his case and he is entitled to get relief. Thus the application succeeds.
Hence, ordered,
That the case no.310 of 2012 be and the same is allowed ex parte against o.p. no.1 with cost.
That the complainant is entitled to get back Rs.17,500/- (Rupees seventeen thousand five hundred) only from o.p. no.1.
O.p. no.1 is also directed to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) only as compensation for harassment and mental agony and Rs.2000/- (Rupees two thousand) only as litigation cost within 45 days from the date of communication of this order, i.d. an interest @ 10% p.a. shall accrue over the entire sum due to the credit of the complainant till full realization.
That the complainant is directed to return the handset in question to o.p.1 at the time of realization of the aforesaid amount.
