Delhi

East Delhi

CC/468/2014

S.K.KAMMOD - Complainant(s)

Versus

MANPREET TELECOM - Opp.Party(s)

03 Jun 2014

ORDER

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM (EAST)

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

CONVENIENT SHOPPING CENTRE, FIRST FLOOR,

SAINI ENCLAVE, DELHI – 110 092

C.C. NO. 468/14

 

Shri S.K. Kammod, Defence Officer

DQA(N)/ DGQA

Ministry of Defence

West Block-V, RK Puram

New Delhi- 110006

•  

Vs

 

M/s Manpreet Telecom

A-159, Vikas Marg

Shakarpur, Delhi- 110092

 

….Opponent

 

Date of Institution: 17.05.2014

Judgment Reserved on: 19.02.2020

Judgment Passed on: 24.02.2020

CORUM:

Sh. SUKHDEV SINGH                  (PRESIDENT)

Dr. P.N. TIWARI                           (MEMBER)

Ms. HARPREET KAUR CHARYA (MEMBER)

 

ORDER BY: HARPREET KAUR CHARYA (MEMBER)

 

 

JUDGEMENT

The present complaint has been filed by Shri S.K. Kammod, the complainant, against M/s Manpreet Telecom, OP.

Initially OP had been proceeded ex-parte and an order was passed on 19.05.2016. Thereafter, the said order was set aside by Hon’ble State Commission in FA No. 398/2016 vide order dated 17.04.2018.

 Facts necessary for the disposal of present complaint are that the Complainant had purchased Nokia cell phone, Model no. 107 bearing serial no. 359578050722943 from OP for Rs. 1,600/-. Invoice bearing no. 9250 dated 06.01.2014 was issued. It has been stated that there was problem with the voice quality of the incoming calls from 07.02.2014, the incoming call details like the name and the number were not appearing on the screen and from 27.04.2014 the mobile was getting into ON/ OFF mode while attending calls. 

OP was informed, where the complainant was asked to approach the Nokia Service Centre. The hand set was examined at Nokia Service Center, Lajpat Nagar, where the complainant was informed that the replacement was to be done by the dealer i.e. OP and even shared the phone number for further assistance.

On 28.04.2014, the complainant visited OP and requested for replacement, the complainant was asked to get the handset alongwith accessories and box. On next day the complainant visited the OP, where he was asked to leave the handset for replacement, but the same was returned to the complainant after 3 days without any reason and advised the complainant to get it repaired from local mechanic.

Again, on 07.05.2014, the complainant visited Nokia Service Centre, Shakarpur, where again he was advised for replacement through dealer. Since, the request for replacement was declined by OP, hence the present complaint with prayer for directions to OP to replace/ repair the handset or refund the cost of the handset i.e. Rs. 1,600/- alongwith litigation charges.

The complainant has annexed retail invoice dated 06.01.2014, token no. 83  for his visit to Nokia Care on 07.05.2014 with the complaint.

Written Statement was filed by OP, where they have taken several objections in their defence such as the complaint was bad for non joinder of necessary parties. It was submitted that Nokia, the manufacturer, was a necessary party for the adjudication of the present complaint.

They have submitted that the complainant had concealed the fact that the handset got damaged due to water and they were mere dealers who could not be held liable in case of manufacturing defect. They have also submitted that as per the terms and conditions printed on the retail invoice the after sale services were to be provided by the service centre. Rest of the contents of the complaint have also been denied.

Rejoinder to the Written Statement was filed by the complainant, where he has re-affirmed the assertions made in the complaint and denied those of the Written Statement.

Evidence by way of affidavit was filed by the complainant. He has stated that the handset was not functioning properly and the said model was authorized by Ministry of Defence for which the permission card had been issued. He has relied upon the certificate by Nokia Care of date 03.06.2014. He has also relied upon annexure with his complaint and the card with respect to the permission to carry mobile phone issued by Ministry of Defence.

Shri Vipin Dandona, Proprietor of M/s Manpreet Telecom, was examined on behalf of OP, where they have repeated the contents of their Written Statement. They have stated that the OP had not received any notice from the complainant nor he had visited their shop.

We have heard the arguments by the complainant and Ld. Counsel for OP. We have also perused the material placed on record. The complainant is aggrieved by the non-working of the handset within few months from purchase, which is evident from the certificate issued by Nokia care, where they have mentioned

“To whomever it is concerned

This is certify that the Nokia 107 is no repair model. For this no repair will be carried out at the Nokia Care Centre.

In case if there is any problem is Nokia 107 customer needs to visit the retailer from where he purchased the handset. If handset qualify the warranty terms and conditions mentioned in the user guide. Then customer will be issued replacement handset from the retailer”

          This certificate has been issued by the authorized service centre of Nokia, the manufacturer, who have not been impleaded as party in the instant case. However, keeping in mind the fact that the complainant has been appearing in person, who might not be aware of the technicalities of law, he should not be made to suffer.

As evident from the certificate issued by the service centre, the handset is not working, therefore, in the facts and circumstances of the present complaint we direct OP to coordinate with Nokia for the replacement of the hand set of same model,  in case the manufacturer has discontinued with the production of Nokia 107, then a handset with same features be handed over to the complainant.  

The order be complied within 30 days from the date of receipt of order.

Copy of this order be sent to both the parties as per law.

 

 

(DR. P.N. TIWARI)                                    (HARPREET KAUR CHARYA)     Member                                                 Member

 

 

(SUKHDEV SINGH)

          President