Punjab

Sangrur

CC/293/2016

Sanjeev Kumar - Complainant(s)

Versus

Managing Director - Opp.Party(s)

Shri Sumir Fatta

09 Sep 2016

ORDER

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SANGRUR

                             

                                                                  Complaint no. 293                                                                                         Instituted on:   15.02.2016                                                                                   Decided on:    09.09.2016

 

Sanjeev Kumar son of Shri Subhash Chand resident of Near S.K.Studio, Bus Stand Road, Village Longowal, Tehsil and District Sangrur.   

                                                …. Complainant

                                Versus

 

1.   Micromax Informatices Limited, Micromax House 90-B, Sector 18, Gurgaon-122015 through its Managing Director.

2.   M/s Kings Electronics Micromax authorized service centre, Guru Nanak Colony, Main Road, opposite Patwar Khana, Bus Stand Road, Sangrur through its authorized signatory.

3.     M/s S.K. Telecom Main Bus Stand, Longowal, Tehsil & District Sangrur through its Proprietor/ partner. 

                                              ….Opposite parties.

 

 

FOR THE COMPLAINANT      :     Shri Sumir Fatta Advocate                          

 

FOR OPP. PARTIES NO.1&2   :     Shri Ashish Grover Advocate                         

 

FOR OPP. PARTY No.3            :       Exparte.

 

 

Quorum

         

                    Sukhpal Singh Gill, President

K.C.Sharma, Member

Sarita Garg, Member

     

ORDER:  

 

Sukhpal Singh Gill, President

 

1.             Sanjeev Kumar, complainant has preferred the present complaint against the opposite parties (referred to as OPs in short) on the ground that he purchased a Micromax mobile model A-114 from OP No.3 for Rs.7500/- vide bill no. 179 dated 16.04.2015 under one year warranty.   In the month of November  2015,  the mobile set in question started creating network problems  of auto switch off and not on for which the complainant approached the OP No.3 who advised to approach OP no.2. Then the complainant approached OP No.2 who kept the set with it and after repair returned the same. In the month of January 2015, the said phone again started giving same problems. The OP No.2 issued job sheet dated 05.01.2016. Thereafter the complainant went to the OP no.2 and requested it to hand over the mobile set but OP no.2 put off the matter on one pretext or the other.  Thereafter the complainant requested the OP No.2 to replace the defective mobile set with new one as it was within the warranty period but they did not do so. Thus, alleging deficiency in service on the part of OPs, the complainant has sought following reliefs:-

i)      OPs be directed to refund Rs.7500/-  as price of the cell phone along with interest @18% per annum from the date of purchase till realization,

ii)     OPs be directed to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs.50000/- as compensation   on account of mental agony, harassment,

iii)   OPs be directed to pay Rs.11000/- as litigation expenses.

2.             Notices were issued to the OPs but despite service OP no. 3 did not appear and as such OP no.3 was proceeded exparte on 04.04.2016. The OPs No.1 and 2 had appeared through Shri Ashish Grover Advocate  and filed reply.

3.             In reply filed by OPs No.1 and 2, it is admitted that in the month of November 2015 the complainant approached the OPs with complaint of  problems of  power does not switch on in the mobile set  and the defect was rectified and complainant was called  to take back the mobile phone but till today he never come to take  the mobile back which is in OK condition. The complainant himself in fault by not taking the mobile set back. Thus, there is no deficiency in service on the part of OPs No.1 and 2.      

4.             The complainant in his evidence has tendered documents Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-4 and closed evidence. On the other hand, OPs No.1&2 have tendered an affidavit Ex.OPs1&2/1 and closed evidence.

5.             It is an admitted case of the Ops that the complainant approached them in the month of November 2015 with complaint of power does not switch on in the mobile set in question which was rectified.  It is specific case of the Ops that after rectification of defect the complainant was called to take back the mobile phone in question which is in OK condition but he had not come to take back the same.  On the other hand, the complainant has stated in the complaint that he approached the OP no.2 and requested them to handover the mobile set but OP no.2 put off the matter on one pretext or the other.    

6.             We have perused the entire record and heard the learned counsel for the parties. After hearing the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties, we find merit in the arguments of the learned counsel Ops  as the complainant  has only stated that despite his request to hand over the mobile set in question the OP No.2 did not hand over the same.  Even if, the OP no.2  did not hand over the mobile set in question despite repeated requests the complainant had the option to complaint against the OP No.2 in this regard  before the competent authority or to write a letter regarding complaint to the higher authority of the service station but he did not do so. It shows that there is no deficiency in service on the part of the Ops.

7.             In view of the above discussion, we find no merit in the present complaint and as such the same is dismissed however the complainant shall be at liberty to collect the mobile set in question from the OP no.2  in proper working condition and after that if there is any defect occurred in the mobile set in question then he is at liberty to approach the Forum for redressal of  his grievance. The OP no.2 is also directed to handover the mobile set in dispute to the complainant in proper working condition to his satisfaction whenever the complainant approaches to it. Copy of the order be supplied to the parties free of charge. File be consigned to records in due course.                                          

                        Announced

                        September 9, 2016

 

 

 

          ( Sarita Garg)  ( K.C.Sharma)           (Sukhpal Singh Gill)                                                                                                                                     Member         Member                            President

 

 

 

BBS/-