West Bengal

Bankura

CC/51/2019

Prabhat Kumar Maji - Complainant(s)

Versus

Mi Service Center Lalbazar - Opp.Party(s)

Jayanta Kumar Mukharjee

06 Dec 2022

ORDER

IN    THE   DISTRICT   CONSUMER   DISPUTES   REDRESSAL COMMISSION BANKURA

Consumer  Complaint  No. 51/2019

Date of Filing : 06.11.2019

Before:

1. Samiran Dutta                Ld. President.      

2. Rina Mukherjee               Ld. Member. 

3.  Sudhakar Ghosh             Ld. Member.

For the Complainant: Ld. Advocate Jayanta Kr. Mukhopadhyay

For the O.P. None  

Complainant  

Prabhat Kumar Maji, Daserbandh, Bankura, P.O., P.S. & District Bankura, Pin – 722101.

 

Opposite Party 

1. MI Service Center, Lalbazar, Bankura Infotek, Pramila Infotech, Ashiyana Apartment, G.Floor 2, feeder Road, Lalbazar, Bankura, West Bengal – 722101.

2. New Bankura Sanchar, 66, Machantala More, Bankura, Pin – 722101.

 

     Order No.23

     Dated 06-12-2022  

  

       Hazira is filed on behalf of the complainant through advocate.

No step is taken by the O.P.

The case is fixed for filing W.V. by the O.P.s subject to limitation but no W.V. has been filed in spite of getting sufficient opportunity. It is the mandate of the Consumer Protection Act that the case is to be heard Ex-parte if no W.V. is filed within the statutory period of limitation. The Commission therefore takes up the record for passing an Ex-parte order.

The complainant purchased one Mobile Handset HSN-85171290 Redmi 7 pro (4 + 64) (N. Blue) on 17-08-2019 for Rs.14,000/- from O.P. No.1. After one month defect was detected on 17-09-2019 and then and there the complainant went to O.P. No.1 for removal of the defects and requested for providing necessary service. According to the service report dated: 24.09.2019 service was carried out by O.P. No.2 who found power of the Mobile set at fault. It is the duty of the Mobile seller / O.P. No.1 to provide necessary service and repair to the Mobile set within the Warrantee period but O.P. No.1 has completely failed to discharge his duty. The complainant has suffered substantial loss for purchase of such a defective Mobile set for which he has claimed for refund of price of the Mobile set i.e. Rs.14,000/- along with compensation of Rs.10,000/-

                                              Contd……p/2

Page: 2

Heard the Ld. Advocate for the complainant.

On perusal of the complaint and the materials on record the Commission finds that the complainant has proved the prima-facie case and he is entitled to get the relief as prayed for.

The case thus succeeds Ex-parte.

Hence it is ordered……

That the instant case be and the same is allowed Ex-parte against O.P. No.1 and dismissed against O.P. No.2.

O.P. No.1 is directed to pay to the complainant Rs.14,000/-  within one month from this date failing which the complainant may realize the same through Execution of the order.

 

                             __________________                        ________________                                          ________________

                          HON’BLE   PRESIDENT                 HON’BLE    MEMBER                              HON’BLE    MEMBER