IN THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,
MURSHIDABAD, AT BERHAMPORE.
CASE No. CC No. 155/2017.
Date of Filing: Date of Admission: Date of Disposal:
12.09.2017 21.09.2017 16.05.2018
Subhas Kumar Mondal @Subhas Mondal
S/O Late Kailash Mondal,Vill- Diar Mahinagar,
PO. Azimganj, PS. Jiaganj Pin- 742122. …………… Complainant.
-vs-
- Manager, Generation Next Technology & Another
15/1, Swarnomoyee Market, (First Floor),
PO & PS. Berhampore, Pin-742101.
- Manager, Balaji Telecom
Stall No. C-52, Prangan Market (Ground Floor),
17, Bimal Sinha Road,
Berhampore, Pin- 742101. …........... Opposite Parties.
Complainant In person …....…… for Complainant
Ex-Parte ………………….……… for Opposite Party
Cont. ……….…. 2
= 2 =
Present : Sri Ashis Kumar Senapati …. ……… President.
Smt. Chandrima Chakraborty …. .…. Member.
J U D G M E N T
Chandrima Chakraborty, Member.
Brief facts which are necessary to dispose of this case are re-capitulated as under :-
In concise, the fact stated in the complaint, is that, the Complainant had purchased a Mobile Phone namely LetV from the Opposite Party no. 2. But after 5/6 months using the same the said Mobile phone was dead for which the Complainant went to the Service Centre who informed the Complainant that they could not repair the said Mobile Phone due to deficiency of parts.
The Complainant repeatedly requested for repairing and/or replace of the said Mobile Phone in question but the Opposite Parties neither replaced the said Mobile Phone nor repair the same what amounts to negligence and deficiency in rendering service by the Opposite Parties towards the Complainant for which being victimized and harassed by the Opposite Parties the Complainant has to file the instant case seeking adequate redressal against the Opposite Parties.
Cont. ……….…. 3
= 3 =
Despite service of the notice, no Opposite Parties ever appeared before the Forum in person and/or through any authorized representative / Ld. Advocate to contest the case by filing Written Version and thus the instant case have been heard ex-parte against both the Opposite Parties.
Point for Consideration
The point for determination in the instant case is whether the complainant is entitled to get the relief as prayed for, in the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the material evidences on record.
Decision with Reasons
In order to prove his allegation set forth in the complaint, the Complainant deposed in this case as sole witness by way of affidavit and also produced some documents in support of his case.
The main allegation of the Complainant against the Opposite Parties is that, in spite of entire payment, both the Opposite Parties had neglected and/or deficient to provide the proper services towards the Complainant.
On overall evaluation of the argument by the Complainant in person and perusing the material documents in record, it is evident that, the Complainant had purchased a Mobile Phone Leco – le – X 509 on 15.09.2016 from the Opposite Party no. 2 shop for total cost of Rs. 10,000/- only which is evident from the photocopies of the documents filed by the Complainant.
Cont. ……….…. 4
= 4 =
The record reveals that the Complainant alleged to be found defective after 5/6 months from the date of purchasing the same and within the warranty period and the Complainant went to the Opposite Party No. 1 for repairing the same.
The Complainant further alleged at the time of hearing the argument that the Service Centre did not repair the said mobile Phone in issue and further not yet returned the said Mobile Phone to the Complainant.
Thus, it is crystal clear from the above discussion that the Complainant proved that the Complainant had purchased a Mobile phone which is defective in its display screen and neither the Opposite Party No. 1 nor the Opposite Party No. 2 is ready to repair and/or replace the said Mobile Phone in question which is definitely the deficient and/or negligent manner of rendering service towards the Complainant.
Moreover, the fact remains that both Opposite Parties never appeared to contest the case and all the allegations made by the Complainant were never challenged by the Opposite Party No. 1, even the Opposite Party never appeared to contest the case. Therefore, there are no reasons to disbelieve the unchallenged testimony of the Complainant.
So the unanimous decision of the Forum is that both the Opposite Party is liable to repair the said Mobile Phone in issue in good condition as to satisfaction of the Complainant.
Therefore, in the light of the above discussion it is finally and commonly decided by the Forum that the Complainant has successfully proved the case and is entitled to get relief as prayed for, and consequently, the points for consideration are decided in affirmative.
Cont. ……….…. 5
= 5 =
In short, the Complainant deserves success.
In the result, we proceed to pass
O R D E R
That the case be and same is allowed on contest against both the Opposite Parties without any cost.
That the Opposite Party Nos. 1 & 2 jointly and severally is directed to repair the said Mobile Phone in dispute in good condition as to satisfaction of the Complainant within one month from the date of this ‘Order’.
In the event of non compliance of any portion of the order by the Opposite Parties within a period of one month from the date of this order, the default Opposite Parties shall have to pay a sum of Rs. 100/- per day, from the date of this order till full satisfaction of the decree, which amount shall be deposited by the said default Opposite Parties in the Consumer Legal Aid Account.
Let a plain copy of this order be made available and be supplied free of cost, to each of the parties on contest in person, Ld. Advocate/Agent on record, by hand under proper acknowledgment / be sent forthwith under ordinary post to the concerned parties as per rules, for information and necessary action.
MEMBER PRESIDENT
