IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ALAPPUZHA
Thursday the 30th day of April, 2015
Filed on 03.12.2014
Present
1. Smt. Elizabeth George (President)
2. Sri. Antony Xavier (Member)
3. Smt. Jasmine D (Member)
in
CC/No.327/2014
Between
Complainant:- Opposite parties:-
Sri. Subrahmanyan.P. 1. Micromax Informatics Ltd.
Retnavilasam 21/14A, Phase II
Cherthala South P.O. Naraina Industrial Area
Alappuzha Delhi – 110 028
(By Adv. Baiju K.S.)
2. M/s. Getronics
Karthika Building (FF)
Oppo. S.D.V. School
Alappuzha – 688 013
3. M/s. Cellular Care
Municipal Shopping Complex
Cherthala, Alappuzha – 688 524
O R D E R
SMT. JASMINE D. (MEMBER)
The brief facts of the complaint are as follows:-
The complainant purchased a mobile phone from the third opposite party manufactured by the first opposite party on 9.9.2014 for an amount of Rs.9500/-. Within a duration of 58 days, the phone became defective. The defect was reported to the authorized service centre of the first opposite party branch at Ernakulam and they intimated the complainant that it will take 4 months time to repair the phone. Thereafter the complainant approached the third opposite party and informed about the defect and as per their direction, the said phone was handed over to second opposite party on 13.11.2014 for repairing and the second opposite party issued a job card. From 25.11.2014 onwards the complainant contacted the second opposite party over telephone, the complainant has not get any response from them. Then the complainant sent an e-mail to the first opposite party regarding the matter that also in futile. On 2.12.2014 the complainant directly approached the second opposite party, but they have no idea about the phone that whether it has been sent to the service centre at Bangalore or Delhi. The mobile phone has not been repaired and returned so far. The complainant sustained much mental agony and inconvenience due to the act of the opposite parties. The complainant who is a Sales Manager of a company has lost many of his business customers and sustained much financial loss also. Hence the complainant filed this complaint alleging deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party, praying for replace or refund of the price of the mobile phone along with compensation and costs.
2. Notices were served to the opposite parties, first opposite party appeared before the Forum and filed version.
3. The version of the first opposite party is as follows:-
The complainant purchased a mobile phone for an amount of RS.9500/- manufactured by the first opposite party. The first opposite party is ready to either replace or refund the price of the mobile phone as the defect was occurred within the warranty period. The first opposite party further contended that the cost and compensation claimed by the complainant is exorbitant.
4. Complainant filed proof affidavit and the documents produced were marked as Ext.A1 to A3. Ext.A1 is the cash bill dated 9.9.2014 for an amount of Rs.9500/- issued by the third opposite party, Ext.A2 is the job sheet dated 13.11.2014 and Ext.A3 is the copy of e-mail dated 15.11.2014 issued to the first opposite party. No oral or documentary evidence adduced on the side of the opposite parties.
5. Considering the allegations of the complainant the Forum has raised the following points for consideration:-
1) Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties?
2) Whether the complainant is entitled to get any reliefs prayed for?
6. Point Nos.1 and 2:- The case of the complainant is that he purchased a mobile phone from the third opposite party manufactured by the first opposite party for an amount of Rs.9500/- on 9.9.2014. Within a few days the phone became defective. On 13.11.2014 the complainant entrusted the phone to the second opposite party who is the authorized service centre of the first opposite party. But the mobile phone was not repaired and returned so far and hence the complainant filed this complaint on 3.12.2014 alleging deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. From Ext.A1 bill it is clear that the complainant purchased a mobile phone worth Rs.9500/-. Ext.A2 shows that the complainant has entrusted a mobile phone to the second opposite party on 13.11.2014 for repairing. It was also clear that the defect was occurred within the warranty period. Ext.A3 it is clear that the said defect was intimated to the first opposite party on 15.11.2014. The complainant filed this complaint on 3.12.2014. The first opposite party filed version on 20.3.2015 stating that they are ready to either replace or refund the price of the mobile phone. Admittedly the complainant entrusted the defective mobile phone to the second opposite party on 13.11.2014 and the same was also intimated to the first opposite party on 15.11.2014. But the opposite parties have not made any earnest efforts to repair and returned the same to the complainant. According to the complainant he is a Sales Manager of a company and he has lost many of the business customers and sustained financial loss also. Since the opposite parties are not returned the mobile phone after repairing they have committed deficiency in service and there is no justification on the part of the opposite parties. The complainant is entitled to get the refund of the price of the mobile phone along with compensation and costs. Hence the complaint is allowed accordingly.
In the result, the complaint is allowed. The first opposite party is directed to refund the price of the mobile phone Rs.9,500/- (Rupees nine thousand and five hundred only) to the complainant. The first and second opposite parties are further directed to pay an amount of Rs.3000/- (Rupees three thousand only) towards compensation and Rs.500/- (Rupees five hundred only) towards costs of this proceedings. The order shall be complied within one month from the date of receipt of this order failing which the complainant is entitled to get 10% interest per annum for the amount of Rs.9500/- from 13.11.2014 till realization.
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her corrected by me and pronounced in open Forum on this the 30th day of April, 2015.
Sd/- Smt. Jasmine.D. (Member) :
Sd/- Smt. Elizabeth George (President):
Sd/- Sri. Antony Xavier (Member) :
Appendix:-
Evidence of the complainant:-
Ext.A1 - Cash bill dated 9.9.2014 for an amount of Rs.9500/- issued by the third opposite
Party
Ext.A2 - Job sheet dated 113.11.2014
Ext.A3 - Copy of e-mail dated 15.11.2014 issued to the first opposite party
Evidence of the opposite parties:- Nil
// True Copy //
By Order
Senior Superintendent
To
Complainant/Opposite party/S.F.
Typed by:- pr/-
Compared by:-pg/-
