ADV. RAVISUSHA, MEMBER.

            The new mobile phone Samsung Galaxy Ace Duos GT-56802 which the complainant has purchased on 28.10.2012 from the Samsung Dealer at Kollam, the first opp.party, showed a display complaint on 27.10.2012.  Since the complainant was traveling he could not register a complaint on the same day.   The next day ie. On 28.10.2012 complainant visited the first opp.party’s shop and they advised to contact the service centre for necessary action but because of Sunday all service centers of Samsung were closed.   Then also the complainant has  registered the complaint over telephone by dialing their toll free number and the reference  is for that call is 8426166254.  On 29.10.2012 complainant went to the service centre at Trivandrum ie, the 2^nd opp.party and registered the complaint with them and they confirmed that there is a defect in the mobile phone and the defect is as “Line on display.”  The complainant requested to the 2^nd opp.party for replacement of  his mobile phone as it has just completed four days from the date of purchase when the said defect has shown.  But they were of the opinion that replacement is possible only if any complaint is registered within four days from the date of purchase as per their company policy.  The complainant came to know about such condition/policy only when the complainant approached them for raising  his issue.  If they informed him about this policy well in time then complainant would have registered his complaint with in that time limit and got it replaced. Here the company absolutely failed to disclose such important condition like this to the customer  at the time of sale and it is a clear case of hiding important information regarding the product from the customer  This as an unfair trade practice of the trader coupled with deficiency in service which is absolutely against the law.   Hence filed this complaint.

Points that would arise for consideration are:

1.     Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of opp.parties

2.     Reliefs and cost.

The Points:  The complainant filed this complaint for getting back the value of mobile phone,  compensation, and for getting other expenses.  Notices were sent to the opp.parties.   After receiving the notices the opp.parties did not appear before the Forum.  Hence opp.parties were declared as exparte.

          Complainant filed chief affidavit and two documents.   The documents were marked as Ext.P1 and P2.  Heard the complainant.   Since the opp.party did not adduce any evidence before the Forum, we are constrained to relay upon the evidence of the complainant.

          Through the complaint, chief affidavit and Exts P1 and P2, the complainant proved his case.   There is deficiency in service on the part of the opp.parties.

          In the result, the complaint is allowed in part.   Except the price of mobile phone, no other evidences has been produced by the complainant for proving  the prayer portion.  Hence the opp.parties are directed to refund Rs.11,900/- the value of Mobile phone.  Opp.parties  are  further directed to pay  Rs.2500/- as compensation and Rs.1000/- as cost to the proceedings.   The order is to be complied with within one month from the date of receipt of this order, failing which Rs.11,900/- will carry interest at the rate of 12% from the date of complaint till payment.

            Dated this the 31^st day of December, 2012.

                                                                                    :

I N D E X

List of witnesses for the complaisant: NIL

List of documents for the complainant

P1. – Invoice

P2. – Quick start guide