Chandigarh

DF-I

CC/153/2020

Sh Bharat Bhushan - Complainant(s)

Versus

Micromax Informatics Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

In Person

09 Nov 2021

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION-I,

U.T. CHANDIGARH

 

                    

Consumer Complaint No.	:	CC/153/2020
Date of Institution	:	19/03/2020
Date of Decision	:	09/11/2021

 

Sh.Bharat Bhushan House No.HM-45, Phase-2 Mohali (SAS Nagar) Email:-bhushanbharat30@gmail.com.

… Complainant

V E R S U S

1. Micromax Informatics Ltd. 288A, Udyog Vihar, Phase IV Gurugram-122015. Email:-info@micromaxinfo.com.
2. M/s Luxmi Communication SCO-296, First Floor, Sector-35D, Chandigarh.

 

… Opposite Parties

CORAM :	RAJAN DEWAN	PRESIDENT
	SURJEET KAUR	MEMBER
	SURESH KUMAR SARDANA	MEMBER

 

                                                

 

ARGUED BY	:	Complainant in person.
	:	OPs ex-parte.

Per Surjeet kaur, Member

1.      Briefly stated the allegations are that the complainant had purchased a Micromax C2A Plus Canvas mobile set from Anmol Watch & Electronic Pvt. Ltd. Sector 22, Chandigarh on dated 01.07.2018 and total cost of this mobile Rs.8690/- which is annexed as Annexure P-1. After four month mobile set created problem of hanging very frequently. The complainant visited to the service centre in the month of October, 2018. The Opposite Party No.2 said that this is the problem of software and we have updated its software. After one month, it started creating same problem again. The mobile stop working and service centre submitted it and provided me a job sheet on dated 20.02.2019, which is annexed as Annexure P-2. The mobile set was not got repaired and we would send to another service centre for repairing. The complainant sent an Email on dated 20^th March, 2019 which is annexed as Annexure P-3 (Colly). The complainant also called on Micromax Company helpline number many a times and discussed the issue which is annexed Annexure P-4. The complainant sent a registered application which is annexed as Annexure P-5. The Micromax Company and Customer Service Centre have indulged in unfair trade practice. Hence, this present consumer complaint.
2.     Notice of the complaint was sent to Opposite Parties No.1 & 2 seeking their version of the case. However, nobody appeared on behalf of Opposite Parties No.1 & 2 despite service, therefore, they were proceeded ex-parte on 09.03.2021.
3.     Complainant led evidence by way of affidavits and documents.
4.     We have heard the complainant in person and gone through the record of the case. After perusal of record, our findings are as under:-
5.     It is evident from Annexure P-1, that the complainant purchased handset in question on 01.07.2018, after spending an amount of Rs.8690/- which is manufactured by Opposite Party No.1. The sole grouse of the complainant in the present complaint is that when he got problem of the hanging in the handset very frequently, reported the same to Opposite Party No.2. Time and again he had to visit Opposite Party No.2 for the same fault. Annexure P-2 dated 20.02.2019 is a job-sheet, but till date the handset has not been handed over to the complainant after necessary repairs. Various follows up with the OPs did not help the complainant for redressal of his genuine grievance. Annexure P-3 colly are the various emails communications exchanged between the complainant and the OPs without any proper solutions, which clearly corroborate the fact that the genuine grievance of the complainant was not given any importance despite wasting so much of energy and precious time by the complainant. Annexure P-6 colly is one more piece of evidence that the complainant tried to resolve his issue through Consumer Association Chandigarh, but in vain.

         After going through evidence on record, we are of the opinion that the act of OPs for not providing proper after sale service, non-repairing the handset, keeping the same in their own possession, very importantly non-appearing during the proceedings of the present case proves deficiency in service and their indulgence in unfair trade practice.

6.     Significantly, Opposite Parties No.1 & 2 did not appear to contest the claim of the complainant and preferred to proceed against ex-parte. This act of the Opposite Parties No.1 & 2 draws an adverse inference against them. The non-appearance of the Opposite Parties No.1 & 2 shows that they have nothing to say in their defence against the allegations made by the complainant. Therefore, the assertions of the complainant go unrebutted and uncontroverted. 
7.     In view of the above discussion, the present consumer complaint succeeds and the same is accordingly partly allowed. Opposite Party No.1 & 2 are directed as under :-

1. to refund amount of ₹8690/- to the complainant alongwith interest @ 9% per annum from the date of purchase till realization.
2. to pay an amount of ₹3,000/- to the complainant as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment to him;
3. to pay ₹2,000/- to the complainant as costs of litigation.

8.     This order be complied with by the Opposite Party No.1 & 2 within thirty days from the date of receipt of its certified copy, failing which, they shall make the payment of the amounts mentioned at Sr.No.(i) & (ii) above, with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of this order, till realization, apart from compliance of direction at Sr.No.(iii) above.
9.     Certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge. The file be consigned.

	Sd/-	Sd/-	Sd/-
09/11/2021	[Surjeet Kaur]	[Suresh Kumar Sardana]	[Rajan Dewan]
Ls	Member	Member	President