CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM PALAKKAD

Dated this the 30^th  day of January, 2017

PRESENT  : SMT. SHINY.P.R, PRESIDENT                           Date of filing: 08/09/2016

                  : SMT.SUMA K.P, MEMBER

                  : SRI. V.P.ANANTHA NARAYANAN, MEMBER

CC/140/2016

  P.I.Siddique,

  Palliparambu Veedu,

  Near ASMM HSS School,

  Alathur post-678541,

  Palakkad, Kerala.

  (By Adv.M.Raveendran)                               :   Complainant

                                                        Vs

 1.Manager,

   Mobile World Electronics Pvt. Ltd,

   Metro Complex, Opp. District,

   Ayurvedic Hospital, Palakkad-678001,Kerala.   :     Opposite parties

 2.Manager,

    Aps Daily Customer Connect point,

    2^nd floor, Metro Complex,

    Opp.Dist. Ayurvedic Hospital,

    Palakkad., Kerala.                    

   (By Adv.M.J.Vince)                                                                  

O R D E R

By Smt. Suma K.P.Member

The complainant purchased a mobile phone from the showroom of Ist opposite party on 09/11/2015 for an amount of Rs.9100/-as per invoice no. 8B/lkdh/4379. The complainant alleges that on 28/04/2016 while he was using the phone, the display went off suddenly and he could not use it thereafter. Hence he contacted Ist opposite party on 29/04/2016 and intimated the fact. They informed him to entrust the phone to second opposite party. The first opposite party also informed that the office of the 2^nd opposite party was functioning at the upstairs of the first opposite party showroom. Hence the complainant entrusted his phone to second opposite party and explained him about the defects. The second opposite party collected the phone from the complainant and issued a receipt for the same. He also informed the complainant that the phone will be returned after rectification within 2 weeks. When the complainant enquired about his phone after two weeks to second opposite party, he told that the phone was not returned after rectification and shall be informed as soon as it reaches after rectification. The second opposite party had not returned the phone even after the expiry of 3 months and when enquired through phone, he used to seek intervals. He informed the said fact to a consumer organization at Alathur viz forum for consumer justice and requested for their help. They issued a registered notice on 03/08/2016 to opposite parties demanding them to return the phone within seven days after rectification or else to replace it with a new mobile phone. Both opposite parties received the notice on 04/08/2016 itself, but they had not acted up on the notice or issued any reply to it . The complainant alleges that the said phone is under warranty, and the opposite parties are bound to repair it free of cost. Without doing so they had committed deficiency of service. Hence he had approached before the forum seeking an order directing the opposite parties to rectify the phone or to replace it with a new phone or to return, the price paid towards it along with Rs.5000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only) for the mental agony suffered by him and also to grant Rs.2000/- towards the cost of this proceedings.

The complaint was admitted and notice was issued to opposite parties for appearance. Both opposite parties failed to appear before the forum in spite of accepting notice. Hence they were called absent and set exparte.

The complainant filed chief affidavit along with documents. Ext.A1 to A4 series were marked. Matter was heard.

Issues that arise for consideration

1. Whether there is any deficiency of service on the part of opposite party?

2. If so, what is the relief and cost entitled to the complainant?

Issues 1 & 2

We have perused the documents and affidavit filed by the complainant. From Ext. A1 it is obvious that complainant had purchased the mobile handset from first opposite party  and from Ext.A2 it is evident that he had entrusted it over to second opposite party for rectification. They had also received the notice issued by the consumer organization as evident from Ext. A3 and A4. The complainant alleges that they had not returned the phone till now. Hence it is a clear case of deficiency of service on the part of opposite parties. In this context, we direct the opposite parties jointly and severally either to handover the mobile phone of the complainant within 10 days of receipt of this order or to replace him with a new handset of the same description. If the same cannot be complied they had to refund the price of Rs.9100/- (Rupee Nine Thousand One Hundred Only) collected from him towards its cost. We also direct the opposite parties jointly and severally to pay Rs.5000/-(Rupees Five Thousand Only) towards compensation for the mental agony suffered by him along with Rs.2000/- (Rupees Two Thousand Only) as cost of this litigation. The afore said amount shall be paid within 1 month from the date of receipt of this order failing which the complainant is entitled to get 9% interest for the said amount from the date of order till realization.

  Pronounced in the open court on 30^th January 2017.   

            Sd/-

     Smt. Shiny. P.R

                         President

                             Sd/-

             Smt. Suma. K.P

                           Member

                              Sd/-

           Sri.V.P.Anantha Narayanan

                          Member

A P P E N D I X

Exhibits marked on the side of complainant

Ext.A1 - Invoice of Mobile world Electronics pvt ltd (Original) dtd:-09/11/2015

Ext.A2 - Copy of Warranty card

Ext.A3 – Job sheet of Apps daily solution pvt ltd. (Photostat copy)

Ext.A4 Series- Acknowledgement card received dtd:-04/08/2016. (Original)

Exhibits marked on the side of opposite party

NIL

Witness marked on the side of complainant

NIL

Witness examined on the side of opposite party

NIL

Cost Allowed

Rs.2000/-