Sri H. Hari Krishana filed a consumer case on 01 Aug 2017 against Manager Gionee Syntech Technology India Pvt., in the Rayagada Consumer Court. The case no is CC/31/2017 and the judgment uploaded on 13 Oct 2017.
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, RAYAGADA,
STATE: ODISHA.
C.C. Case No.31/ 2017. Date. 01.09.2017 .
P R E S E N T .
Sri Gadadhara Sahu, B.Sc. President I/C.
Smt. Padmalaya Mishra, LL.B Member
Sri H.Hari Krishna, S/O: Late H.Satya Rao, Kasturi Nagar, Ist. Lane,
Po/ Dist. Rayagada, Odisha. ………Complainant
Vrs.
1.The Manager, Mobi world, Po/Dist: Rayagada
2. The Manager, Gionee Service Centre, Po/Dist: Rayagada, Odisha.
3.The Manager, Syntech Technology India Pvt. Ltd., F-2, Block No. B-1, Ground Floor, Mohan Co-operative Industrial Estate, Mathura Road, New Delhi, 110044.
4.The Manager, U.D. Steel solutions Pvt. Ltd., Jessore Road, Flat No.9(B), Ground Floor, Kolkatta- 700089. ……...Opp.Parties
For the Complainant:- Self.
For the O.P:- Set exparte.
JUDGMENT
The present dispute arises out of the complaint petition filed by the above named complainant alleging deficiency in service against afore mentioned O.Ps for non refund of the the sale price of mobile set Gionee. The brief facts of the case has summarised here under.
That the complainant had purchased one mobile phone manufactured and marketed by the O.Ps No.3 & 4 through O.P. No.1 the authorized dealer on Dt. 08.04.2016 Gionee P 5L, Blue- with IMEI No. 869813020193591 for a total price of Rs.8,700/-with one year warranty having the service facility provided at Rayagada itself. The mobile set purchased by the complainant is a defective one and suppressing the above fact by the O.P. No. 3 & 4 marketed the product through the O.P. No.1 and the O.P. No.2 who is the service provider for the O.P.s confirmed the defects and the report is filed along with this petition. It has provided with touch screen but it is not working properly and hanging problem. So also the battery is discharging automatically and giving heat to the product and also to the charger. The matter was referred to the O.P. No.2 two times and he was not able to remove the said problem stating that it is having inherent manufacturing defect in it and only the O.Ps 3 and 4 can do any thing. Ultimately the said set is returned without removing the defects and as such the complainant has approached for the following reliefs. During the warranty period the set has given constant trouble and the service provider is unable to remove the said problem and as such by paying the price of the mobile Rs.8,700/- the complainant has purchased mental agony and trouble and as such the above sales practice by the O.P. No. 1, 3 & 4 are deemed to be unfair. In view of the constant problem the complainant prays the forum direct the O.Ps to refund the cost of the mobile set Rs.8,700/-with interest and for causing the mental agony and financial loss award a cost of Rs.5,000/- and also award cost of the litigation and such other relief as the hon’ble forum deems fit and proper for the best interest of justice.
The O.Ps were received notice from the forum as revealed from the postal receipt, but neither appeared nor choose to file written version. The statutory period for filing of written version was over. Hence the O.Ps were set exparte. So the case was posted for hearing to close the case within the time frame as per the C.P. Act.
During the exparte hearing the complainant examined himself and proved the payment of the money to the O.Ps. The complainant has also produced the service job sheet including warranty card relating to the above case. The complainant also argued due to non repair of the above set the complainant suffered a lot of financial trouble and mental agony. The complainant prays the forum as the O.Ps not heard any grievance of the complainant till date so the O.Ps be directed to refund purchase price along with bank interest.
In the absence of any denial by way of written version from the side of the O.Ps. it is presumed that the allegations levelled against the O.Ps. deemed to have been proved. The complainant had paid the amount for the good service as per warranty card which intended with the O.P and the said payment is made for the consideration for the said service. When the O.Ps have failed to give such service as per warranty card for which the O.Ps have received the amount. It is deemed that the O.Ps were callous to the allegations and it amounts to deficiency of service.
In the present case the O.Ps . are jointly and several liable.
Hence to meet the ends of justice, the following order is passed.
ORDER.
In the result with these observations, findings, discussion the complaint petition is allowed in part on exparte against the O.Ps.
The O.Ps are ordered to take back their product and refund price of the Gionee mobile set a sum of Rs. 8,700/- to the complainant. The O.Ps are further ordered to pay Rs.1,000.00 towards litigation expenses.
The O.Ps are ordered to comply the above direction within one month from the date of receipt of this order, failing which an interest @ Rs.9% per annum would accrue on the decrial amount. from the date of default till realization. Serve the copies of the order to the parties.
Dictated and corrected by me
Pronounced on this 1st. day of September , 2017.
MEMBER. PRESIDENT.
Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes
Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.