Chandigarh

DF-II

CC/222/2016

Ram Niwas Garg - Complainant(s)

Versus

Micromax Customer Service Head - Opp.Party(s)

H.P.S. Kochhar Adv.

14 Dec 2016

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II,

U.T. CHANDIGARH

Consumer Complaint  No	:	222 of 2016
Date  of  Institution	:	30.03.2016
Date   of   Decision	:	14.12.2016

 

 

 

 

Ram Niwas Garg, H.No.707, Industrial Area, Phase-2, Ram Darbar, UT, Chandigarh

                …..Complainant

Versus

 

1.     Micromax Customer Service Head, Micromax House, 90-B, Sector 18, Gurgaon, Haryana-122015.

 

2.     AKS Telecom, SCO No.9, 1^st Floor, Sector 20-D, Chandigarh 160022 through its Manager.

 

        2^nd Address:

AKS Telecom, Quite Office No.1, First Floor, Sector 35-A, Opposite Khukhrain Bhawan, Chandigarh through its Manager.

 

3.     Mehta Traders, SCO No.223, Motor Market, Near Local Bus Stand, Mani Majra, UT, Chandigarh through its Manager.

….. Opposite Parties

 

BEFORE:    SH.RAJAN DEWAN, PRESIDENT

                SH.RAVINDER SINGH, MEMBER

                SMT.PRITI MALHOTRA, MEMBER

 

Argued By:

Sh.HPS Kochhar, Adv. for the complainant

Sh.Amandeep Singh, Adv. for OP No.1.

OPs No.2 & 3 exparte.

 

PER RAJAN DEWAN, PRESIDENT

 

                  In brief, the case of the complainant is that he purchased a mobile set make Micromax, Model Juice A177 vide invoice dated 06.12.2014 for Rs.7000/- from OP No.3, having warranty of one year.  However, it developed defect in month of May-June, 2015 and the OPs were unable to rectify the problem of charging of the battery.  On 01.12.2016, the mobile set was again handed over to OP No.2 vide job sheet (Annexure C-2) but after making several follows ups and personal visits, the mobile set was given back with the assurance that the same was repaired.  According to the complainant, on his complaint regarding non-repairing of the mobile handset, he was given another used handset on 12.01.2016 by OP No.2 but the same was not working.  On his complaint, he was again given another used set by OP No.2 on 22.01.2016 with the same problem. It has further been averred that he wrote e-mail to OP No.1, Annexure C-3 and registered letter dated 02.03.2016, Annexure C-4(Colly.) in this regard, but to no effect.  Alleging that the aforesaid acts amount to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the Opposite Parties, the complainant has filed the instant complaint.

2.         In its written statement, OP No.1 has pleaded that the complainant has not disclosed the correct facts and tried to mislead the Forum by making false, frivolous and baseless allegations.  It has further been pleaded that the complainant purchased the mobile phone on 06.12.2014 and the warranty of the same expired on 05.12.2015. The complainant approached the service center on 01.12.2015 with various problems and the authorized service center swapped the mobile phone in question on 12.01.2016 but later on he started raising false and frivolous issues as he wants the refund of the mobile handset.  It has further been pleaded that the complainant has filed the present complaint to harass the OPs. It has further been pleaded that the replacement as per the limited warranty terms is limited only to those cases where repair is not possible and/or where there is genuine problems of repeated repairs. The remaining allegations have been denied, being false. Pleading that there is no deficiency in service on its part, a prayer for dismissal of the complaint has been made.
3.         Despite due service through registered post, Opposite Parties No.2 & 3 failed to put in appearance and as a result thereof they were ordered to be proceeded against exparte vide order dated 13.05.2016.
4.         The parties led evidence in support of their contentions.
5.         We have heard the learned Counsel for the contesting parties and have also perused the record.
6.         After hearing the Counsel for the contesting parties and going through the evidence on record, we are of the considered view that the complaint is liable to be accepted for the reasons recorded hereinafter.    It is an admitted fact between the parties that the mobile phone became defective during the warranty period and the same was deposited with the OPs on 01.12.2015, which was swapped on 12.01.2016.  Since the swapped mobile phone was not working properly and therefore, the same was again swapped on 22.01.2016, but to the irony of the complainant, even the swapped phone was not working and as such he again approached the Service Center of the OPs and even wrote an e-mail dated 23.02.2016 to OP No.1 and sent a registered letter dated 02.03.2016 to the OPs in this regard but they did not bother to redress the genuine grievance of the complainant.  Ultimately, the complainant has to invoke the jurisdiction of this Forum for redressal of his grievance. We, thus, deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case that no useful purpose would be served by directing the OPs again to replace the mobile phone in question with a new one because the same has already been swapped twice by the OPs themselves and in case the replaced mobile phone develops the defect again then the consumer will be put to much larger harassment because he had to fight another bond of litigation which will be highly torturous for him.
7.         Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice, OPs No.1 and 2 are directed to pay Rs.7,000/- i.e. price of the mobile handset in question with lump sum compensation of Rs.3,000/-, within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order, failing which they shall be liable to pay the interest @ 9% p.a. on the awarded amounts from the date of this order till actual payment.
8.         However, the complaint qua OP No.3 stands dismissed.
9.         Certified copy of this order be communicated to the parties, free of charge. After compliance file be consigssned to record room.

Announced                                                                            sd/-

14.12.2016                                                            (RAJAN DEWAN)

PRESIDENT

Sd/-

(PRITI MALHOTRA)

MEMBER

Sd/-

(RAVINDER SINGH)

MEMBER