By  Sri.P.K,.Sasi, President

          The case of the complainant is that he has purchased a cell phone from the 2^nd opposite party manufactured by the 1^st opposite party.  At the time of purchase the 2^nd opposite party has assured 1 year’s warranty for the mobile phone.  Within a short period the handset showed several complaints like developing heat on making calls and on recharging, losing of battery charge, hanging on while calling, unwanted automatic dialing to numbers, failure of charging  and loss of range signal even in locations having full range etc.  Immediately the complainant approached 2^nd opposite party and as per their direction complainant approached 3^rd opposite party, who is the authorized service centre of the manufacturer of the phone.  On 21/6/16 he entrusted the phone with the 3^rd opposite party and thereafter since there was no response from the side of 3^rd opposite party for several days, on 18/8/16 another cell phone was received by the complainant through courier.  There was no charger inside the packet.  Only one cell phone was sent by the opposite party.  On examination it was found that the phone sent by the opposite parties was not a new one, it was another used phone.  Immediately the complainant approached the 2^nd opposite party and intimated the facts.  But they did not take any care to the grievances  submitted by the complainant.  Hence a lawyer notice was sent to the opposite party.  But there was no response from their side.  On 19/11/17 another lawyer notice was issued.  Even then there was no response from the side of opposite parties.  Hence this complaint is filed for getting relief.

          2. On receiving complaint, notice was properly sent to all the opposite parties.  Even after accepting the notice, only the 3^rd opposite party appeared before the Forum through counsel.  However 3^rd opposite party appeared through counsel, no version was filed.  Hence all the opposite parties set exparte and posted for complainant’s evidence.

          3. 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 has also produced 9 documents, which are marked as Exts.P1 to P9.  Ext.P1 is purchase bill, Ext.P2 is warranty card, Ext.P3 is A/D card issued by 3^rd opposite party while receiving  the phone dated 21/6/16, Ext.P4 is courier slip, Ext.P5 is copy of lawyer notice dated 3/9/16, Ext.P6 is postal receipt, Ext.P7 is copy of lawyer notice dated.19/1/17, Ext.P8 series are postal receipts and Ext.P9 series are A/D cards.  Complainant produced the mobile phone sent by the opposite parties and marked as MO1.  We heard the learned counsel for the complainant in detail.

          4. Since there is no contra evidence available from the side of opposite parties, we are inclined to accept the proof affidavit filed by the complainant.  We have gone through the contents of affidavit and perused the documents produced from the side of complainant.  On perusing the documents, it is found that mobile phone was entrusted with the 3^rd opposite party in the warranty period to rectify the defects.  If at all any contra evidence was there for any of the opposite parties, they ought to have been appeared before the Forum and submitted their version.  Nothing has been done by the opposite parties. 

          5. In the result we allow this complaint and the 3^rd opposite party, who is the authorized service centre is directed to replace the defective phone with a new one or to give Rs.6,600/- (Rupees Six thousand and six hundred only) the cost of the phone along with Rs.3,000/- (Rupees Three thousand only) as cost and compensation to the complainant within one month from receiving copy of this order.  Failing which, the complainant is entitled to get 9% interest for all those amounts till realization.  After complying the order, the 3^rd opposite party can recover that amount from the manufacturer, the 1^st opposite party.

          Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the open Forum this the   28^th   day  of September                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          2017.