BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ERNAKULAM.

Dated this the 18^th day of July 2017

Filed on : 04-01-2017

PRESENT:

Shri. Sheen Jose, Member.

(President-in-Charge)

Smt. Beena Kumari V.K. Member.

CC.No.4/2017

Between

Ashek N.R., : Complainant

S/o. Radhakrishnan, (party-in-person)

Nikathil house, Mannam P.O.,

North Paravoor,

Ernakulam-683 520.

And

1. Jaison, : Opposite parties

Manager, (Absent)

Micromax Service Centre,

Usanaz Tower,

Medical Trust Hospital Jn,

M.G. Road, Palimukk, Cochin.

2. Ajeesh, Manager,

MY G, 5/485 A1 Azure

Arcade North Paravoor,

Ernakulam-682 016.

3. Micro Max – Rahul Sharma

-CEO, Micromax House, 697,

Udyog Vihar Phase -V,

Gurgaon, Hariyana, India.

O R D E R

Beena Kumari V.K., Member.

This complaint is filed by the complainant Sri. Ashok, alleging deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties during the warranty period of the mobile phone purchased by him. The complainant purchased a mobile phone Micro max canvas Unit Pro, on 08-09-2016 valued Rs. 8,999/-. After 10 days of its purchase, the mobile phone showed many complaints and the mobile phone turns to dead mode while it was being used. The complainant went to MyG showroom registered his complaints and demanded for the replacement of the mobile phone. The show room manager directed the complainant to approach the office of the Micromax in Ernakulam and the mobile phone was entrusted with the 1^st opposite party service centre, Ernakulam for servicing on 23-09-2016. The serviced mobile phone was returned to the complainant after 4 days. But within a few days the mobile phone showed the very same complaint. The mobile phone went to dead-mode again. The mobile phone also showed other defects like Hanging, low display brightness, non-availability of net work etc. In the circumstances, the complainant filed this complaint seeking directions to the opposite parties to refund the price amount of the mobile phone and to pay Rs. 15,000/- towards compensation for the mental agony suffered by the complainant along with costs of the proceedings.

1. 2. Notices were issued to the opposite parties and the 1^st opposite party was served with the notice but the 1^st opposite party did not appear before this Forum in response to the notice served on them. The notice sent to the 2^nd opposite party returned as 'unclaimed'. Thus both the1st and 2^nd opposite parties were set ex-parte. The notice issued to the 3^rd opposite party is not yet returned. The1st opposite party authorized service centre is also duty bound to inform the 3^rd opposite party manufacturer about this case.

   3. The evidence in this case consisted of the exparte proof affidavit filed by the complainant and the documentary evidence marked as Exbt. A1 to A3 on the side of the complainant.

   4. The issues to be decided in this case are as follows:

i. Whether the complainant has proved deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties or inherent defects in the mobile phone purchased by him?

ii. Whether the complainant is entitled to get refund of the price of the mobile phone from the opposite parties?

iii.Whether the opposite parties are liable to pay compensation to the complainant along with costs of the proceedings?

5. The complainant was heard on 04-07-2017.

6. Issue No.(i). and (ii). Exbt. A1, Invoice No. 1/PAR/145 dated 08-09-2016 issued by My G Paravoor 5/485 A1, Azure Arcade, North Paravoor, Ernakulam goes to show that the complainant had purchased a micromax mobile phone Q 465 canvas Unit 4 pro gold which was Manufactured by the 3^rd opposite party – Micromax. The complainant paid Rs. 8,999/- towards the price of the above mobile phone on 08-09-2016. The case of the complainant is that the mobile phone became dead after 10 days of its purchase. The above fact was proved by the ex-parte proof affidavit filed by the complainant. We find no reason to discard the sworn statement made by the complainant also. Exbt. A2 is the job sheet dated 14-12-2016 issued by the 1^st opposite party – the authorized service centre of Micromax wherein the defects like “hanging, Display brightness low, net work not available, any call not attend this phone” are noted. Thus we find that the mobile phone showed very serious defects as stated above immediately after 3 months of its purchase. The above defects were rectified and the repaired mobile phone was returned to the complainant. Again on 12-01-2017 the mobile phone was entrusted with 1^st opposite party Micromax service centre for repair. This time, the defects noticed are “continuously showing 'Android is starting for a long, 4G not available, Auto off and taking long time for getting 'on'. Already s/w updated serviced” “Thus right from the 10^th day of purchase, the mobile phone showed recurring and other serious defects which go to show that the mobile phone is suffering from inherent manufacturing defects. We find that the complainant has sufficiently proved inherent defects of the mobile phone. Therefore the complainant is entitled to get refund of the price of the mobile phone.

7. Issue No. (iii) The complainant had spent his hard earned money to purchase the mobile phone and he spent Rs. 8,999/- to purchase the mobile phone and he spent Rs. 8,999/- to purchase the subject in phone. But he could enjoy the facilities of a new mobile phone only for 10 days. After that the mobile phone became defective and the recurring defects and services, inflicted severe mental agony to the complainant. We find that he is entitled to get compensation from the opposite parties for the mental agony and inconvenience suffered by him. We fix the compensation amount at Rs. 5,000/-. The complainant has also spent his valuable time and money to contest this case before this Forum. Had the opposite parties replaced the defective mobile phone with a brand new mobile phone of the same/higher configuration during the warranty period, this complaint would not have been filed by the complainant. We find that he is therefore entitled to get costs of the proceedings which we fix at Rs. 2,000/-.

8. In the result, the complaint is partly allowed and we direct as follows.

i. The opposite parties shall refund the price of the mobile phone of Rs. 8,999/- to the complainant.

ii. The opposite parties shall pay to the complainant Rs. 5,000/- to the complainant towards compensation for the mental agony and inconvenience suffered by the complainant.

iii. The opposite parties shall also pay Rs. 2,000/- towards costs of this proceedings.

iv. The opposite parties are jointly and severally pay the above amounts to the complainant.

The above order shall be complied with, within 30 days of the receipt; of a copy of this order, failing which the above amounts except costs, shall carry 12% interest p.a. from the 31^st day of the receipt of this order till the date of realization.

Pronounced in the open Forum on this the 18^th day of July 2017

Sd/-

Beena Kumari V.K. Member.

Sd/-

Sheen Jose, Member.

(president-in-charge)

Forwarded/By Order,

Senior Superintendent.

Appendix

Complainant's exhibits:

Exbt. A1 : Copy of Tax invoice dt. 08-09-2016

A2 : Customer copy 14-12-2016

A3 : Copy of warranty

Opposite party's exhibits : Nill

Copy of order despatched on :

By Post: By Hand