IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ALAPPUZHA
Thursday the 30th day of November, 2017
Filed on 10.03.2015
Present
1. Smt. Elizabeth George (President)
2. Sri. Antony Xavier (Member)
3. Smt. Jasmine D (Member)
in
CC/No.78/2015
Between
Complainant:- Opposite parties:-
Sri. Xavier Wiliam 1. M/s Micromax
Varekat House Micromax House
Abraham Tharakan Road 90B, Sector-18, Gurgaon
Eramalloor, Alappuzha -682537 Pin-122015
2. Exclusive Care
USNAZ Tower
Opp. Medical Trust Hospital
M.G.Road, Eranakulam
Pin. 682016
3. A.V. Associates
Gandhinagar, No.136
Vazhudavur Road
Gandhinagar, Puduchery
Pin. 605 001.
4. Suvans Softo, D-34
CC Colony
Opp. RP Bagh, Delhi-110007
O R D E R
SMT. JASMINE D. (MEMBER)
The case of the complaint in short are as follows:-
The complainant purchased a mobile phone manufactured by the 1st opposite party on 10/1/2014 through online. The product has one year warranty. After 2 months from the date of purchase the product shows same complaint with regards to the ‘Touch Screen” and entrusted to the 2nd opposite party for repairing the same and the 2nd opposite party repaired and returned the phone on 22/3/2014. Even though the product was under warranty the 2nd opposite party has charged an amount of Rs. 300/- from the complainant for repairing the same. But the mobile phone became again defective and shows the same problems with regards to the touch screen and the complainant again the phone entrusted to the 2nd opposite party on 30/8/2014. The 2nd opposite party returned the phone to the complainant only after 2 months and due to the delay in rectifying the defects the complainant was forced to buy another phone worth Rs. 1375/- . Since the 2nd opposite party could not repair the phone they replaced the phone with a new one on 28/1/2017 which also became defective and entrusted to the 2nd opposite party for repairing. The complainant was in need to another phone as he is going to a trip to Philipanes and Singapore. So he purchased a micromax doodle mobile phone on 9/9/2014 for an amount of Rs. 13,500/-. The complainant had chosen this model as per assurance given by the opposite party regarding the quality of the camera of the said phone. But unfortunately the phone was also not working the complainant could not take photos of the places he visit. On 17/10/2015 with the complainant returned from abroad and he entrusted the phone to the 2nd opposite party on 18/10/2017 and the product was returned on 20/10/2014. But the said phone became again defective on 13/12/2014 and it was entrusted to the 2nd opposite party on 15/12/2014 and opposite party informed the complainant it will take that 20 to 30 days for repairing the product. Since both of the phone of the complainant was not working. Complainant purchased another phone Micro Soft Lumia. So the complainant claimed for the refund of price of the mobile phone together with a compensation of Rs.2,10,850/- from the opposite party including cost of the proceedings.
2. Notice was issued to the opposite parties, notice against opposite parties 2 and 4 served. Notice against 3rd opposite party, returned as left. Notice against 1st opposite party not returned. 2nd opposite party appeared before the Forum and filed version..
3. Version of the 2nd opposite party is as follows:-
Complaint is not maintainable. At the outset it is most respectfully submitted that this opposite party is an unnecessary party to this proceedings. This opposite party is only a servicing centre/ servicing agent of the 1st opposite party M/s MicromaxHouse, 90B, Sector 18, Gurgaon-15. It is submitted that as per the agreement between the 1st opposite party and this opposite party if any customer of the 1st opposite party approaches this opposite party regarding complaints of the mobile handsets, camera, laptop etc, this opposite party will register the complaints as briefed by the customer and notify the same to the 1st opposite party. After notifying the aforesaid complaints to the 1st opposite party this opposite party will register a claim and issue job sheet regarding the repairs. Thus from the permission of the 1st opposite party (Micromax India Pvt. Ltd) this opposite party will rectify/repair the complaint. It is further submitted that this opposite party will repair the mobile hand set issued by the 1st opposite party within the warranty period only. If the complaint in the mobile hand set issued by the 1st opposite party this opposite party will send the defective mobile set to the workshop/ repair centre of the 1st opposite party at Delhi. In the above numbered case this opposite party hand set the two defective hand set viz 1) Micromax Canvas MT 500 (2) Micromax Doodle to the workshop/ repair centre of the 1st opposite party at Delhi. The averment in the complaint that this opposite party had not called up the complainant nor bothered to attend the phone calls from the complainant etc. are the absolutely false, baseless and hence denied. On receipt of the said mobile phones from the complainant this opposite party found that the said mobile phones had manufacturing defects and hence send to the workshop/ repair centre of the 1st opposite party at Delhi. The agreement between the 1st opposite party and this opposite party is produced herewith. It is submitted that the averments in the complaint that due to the negligence of this opposite party the petitioner had to visit this opposite party’s office for 15 times etc. are absolutely false and hence denied. This opposite party had promptly informed the complainant about the defects in the mobile hand set and notified that the same has been send to the workshop/ repair centre of the 1st opposite party at Delhi. Complaint is not entitled any relief amount from this opposite party and this opposite party had not committed any deficiency in service, unfair trade practice or caused any mental agony and inconvenience to the complainant. The complainant is not at all entitled to get any amount towards cost of proceedings or any other reliefs. There for the complaint may be dismissed.
4. Complainant filed proof affidavit and documents Ext.A1 to A6 were marked.
5. Considering the allegations of the complainant, the Forum has raised the following issues:-
1) Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties?
2) Whether the complainant is entitled to get any reliefs?
6. The case of the complainant is that the complainant purchased 2 mobile phone manufactured by 1st opposite party through online. 1st Opposite party assured one year warranty for the product. During the warranty period both the product became defective and entrusted to the 2nd opposite party who is the authorized service centre of the 1st opposite party. But the product has not been returned so far The complainant further alleged that he purchased 2nd phone that is the Micromax Doodle with a view to take photographs while he was going for a trip abroad . Since the phone became functionless the complainant could not take the photos and he sustained much mental agony also. Hence filed this complaint seeking refund of the price of the mobile phone together with compensation and cost.
7. Complainant filed proof affidavit and documents produced were marked as Ext.A1 to A6.
According to the complainant both the phones he purchased became defective during the warranty period and entrusted to the 2nd opposite party who is the authorized service centre of the 1st opposite party to get it repaired or replaced. But the opposite parties failed either to repair the phone or to replace the phone. The 2nd opposite party in their version admitted that the complainant has entrusted both the phone since both of them have manufacturing defect it was sent to the work shop of the 1st opposite party at Delhi. So from the version of the 2nd opposite party it is clear that both the phone have manufacturing defect and it was sent to the 1st opposite party at Delhi and it was not returned so far. The opposite parties have not made any earnest effort to redress the grivences of the complainant. The opposite parties failed to provide the assured after sale service to the complainant and hence they have committed deficiency in service and are laible to compensate the complainant for the mental agony and inconvenience caused to him
In the result the complaint is allowed, opposite parties are directed to refund the price of the both mobile phones Rs.9500/- and Rs. 13,500/- to the complainant. The opposite parties are further directed to pay an amount of Rs. 5000/- towards compensation and Rs.1000/-(Rupees One Thousand only) towards cost. Order shall be complied with one month from the date of the receipt of this order. , failing which the amount Rs. 23000/- shall carry interest @ 9% per annum from the date of the complaint till realization.
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by him corrected by me and pronounced in open Forum on this the 30th day of November, 2017.
Smt. Jasmine.D. (Member) : .
Smt. Elizabeth George (President):
Sri. Antony Xavier (Member) :
Appendix:-
Evidence of the complainant:-
Ext.A1 - Copy of Tax Invoice dtd.10/1/2014
Ext.A2 - Copy of Retail Invoice dtd.09/09/2014
Ext.A3 - Copy of Job sheet dtd. 22/3/2014
Ext.A4 - Copy of Job sheet
Ext.A5 - Copy of Job sheet dtd. 18/10/2014
Ext.A6 - Copy of Job sheet dtd. 15/12/2014.
Evidence of the opposite parties:- Nil
// True Copy //
By Order
Senior Superintendent
To
Complainant/Opposite party/S.F.
Typed by:- Br/-
Compared by:-
