Present: 1. Sri.P.K.Sasi, President.
2. Smt. Sheena.V.V., Member.
3. Sri.M.P.Chandrakumar, Member
28th day of February 2017
C.C.635/16 filed on 08/11/16
Complainant : Lijo K.L., Kollannurkkaran House,
P.O. Mannuthy, Pananjakam,
Thrissur – 680 651
(In Person)
Opposite Parties : 1) Micromax Informatics Ltd., 21/14 A,
Phase II, Waralna Industrial Area,
Delhi – 110 028.
2) M/s Tech Beam, 2nd Floor,
Lakshmi tower, Parayil Lane, M.G. Road,
Thrissur – 680 004.
(By Adv. P.S. Ajithkumar for R2)
O R D E R
By Sri.P.K,.Sasi, President
The case of the complainant is that on 19/09/15 he has purchased a Micro Max mobile phone from the 2nd opposite party Venu’s Digital Arcade, Thrissur which was manufactured by the 1st opposite party. He could use the phone without complaints hardly for 1 ½ months only. Then the mobile showed several complaints and that was rectified by the authorized service centre more than 8 times. There was warranty for one year and it was told by the service centre that the complainant has to make payments for the repairing after the warranty period. According to the complainant the phone sold by the 2nd opposite party was defective one thereby the 2nd opposite party committed deficiency in service towards the complainant. Hence this complaint is filed for getting relief.
2) On receiving notice the 2nd opposite party entered appearance through counsel and filed detailed version. Whereas, the 1st opposite party even after accepting the notice neither appeared before the Forum nor submitted any version. Hence set ex-parte. The 2nd opposite party in their version submitted that the complainant has brought his phone for servicing on several times and that was properly done by the opposite party without any delay. They further submitted that after the warranty period without collecting service charge they can’t do the repair works. The 2nd opposite party further submitted that there is no consumer relationship with complainant. They also submitted that there is no deficiency in service or unfair trade practice happened on their part and prayed for the dismissal of the complaint.
3) Then the case was posted for evidence and the points for consideration was that
1) whether there was any deficiency in service
happened on the part of opposite party ?
2) if so what cost and relief ?
4) From the side of complainant he has appeared before the Forum and submitted proof affidavit in which he has affirmed and explained all the averments stated in the complaint in detail. He also produced 3 documents which are marked as Ext. P1 to P3. Ext. P1 is the purchase bill; Ext. P2 is the copy of job sheet and Ext. P3 is another service report. The complainant produced the defective mobile phone before the Forum which is marked as MO1. No evidence adduced from the side of 2nd opposite party.
5) We heard both sides in detail. It is submitted by the complainant that he could use the phone only for a short while without any complaint. He further submitted in his proof affidavit that more than 8 times the phone repaired by the 2nd opposite party within the warranty period. Since there is no contra evidence from the side of opposite party we are inclined to accept the evidence submitted by the complainant. We perused the defective phone also. The complainant submitted that he produced the phone before the Forum since it is totally useless for him. He prayed for maximum compensation since he has lost his several working days by wandering with this phone to the service centre.
In the result, we allow this complaint and the 2nd opposite party being the authorized service centre is directed to pay Rs.6,000/- (Rupees Six thousand only) along with Rs.1,500/- (Rupees thousand five hundred only) as cost and compensation to the complainant within one month from receiving copy of this order. After complying this order the 2nd opposite party can recover Rs.6,000/- the cost of the phone from the 1st opposite party who is the manufacturer of the phone. Failing which, the complainant is entitled to get 12% interest till realization.
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the open Forum this the 28th day of February 2017.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
M.P.Chandrakumar Sheena.V.V. P.K.Sasi, Member Member President.
Appendix
Complainant’s Exhibits
Ext. P1 purchase bill
Ext. P2 copy of job sheet
Ext. P3 another service report.
MO 1 Mobile Phone
Id/-
President
