BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, AMRITSAR.
Consumer Complaint No. 41 of 2016
Date of Institution: 29.1.2016
Date of Decision :8.04.2016
Mr. Avnish Kumar S/o Sh.Tarlok Chand, Server Room, Ground Floor, District & Session Court, Amritsar, Near DC Office
Complainant
Versus
- Micromax Mobile through its Managing Director/CEO/Office Incharge, Main Office, Plot No. 297F, Phase 8B, Industrial area, Mohali Punjab
- Infinity Enterprises-Bij Khasra No.631, Phirni Sadak, Village Bijwasan, Near CISF Camp, City Delhi/State Delhi through its Proprietor/Partner/Office Incharge
- M/s. Simran Enterprises, 7-B, Ist Floor, Near Lal Devi Mandir, Rani Ka Bagh, Amritsar through its Partner/Prop./Officer Incharge
Opposite Parties
Complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986
Present: For the Complainant : In person
For the Opposite Parties 1 & 3 : Sh. Ajay Shanker,Advocate
Quorum
Sh.S.S.Panesar, President
Ms.Kulwant Kaur Bajwa, Member
Sh. Anoop Sharma, Member
Order dictated by:
Sh.S.S. Panesar, President.
1. Avnish Kumar, complainant has brought the instant complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act as amended upto date, on the allegations that complainant purchased one mobile set model Canvas Spark 0380, 8GB ROM Black , IMEI No. 911429301014204/9114293011152089 of Micromax company online from opposite party No.2 vide invoice No. S2CBCE/15-16/70391 dated 20.5.2015 on payment of Rs. 5660/-. As such the complainant is the consumer under the definition of Consumer Protection Act. The mobile set purchased by the complainant is the product of opposite party No.1 and at the time of the purchase, opposite parties No.1 & 2 assured for its quality with guarantee/warranty of one year from the date of the purchase. After use of about 3 months, the mobile set started creating trouble and its touch screen had broken. At this, the complainant approached opposite party No.3 which is the service centre of opposite party No.1 at Amritsar and they received the mobile set from the complainant against job sheet dated 12.8.2015. Opposite party No.3 received Rs. 1000/- from the complainant as charges of the touch screen and the said fact is also mentioned on the job sheet. Opposite party No.3 assured the complainant that they will change the broken touch screen within two/three days and would call the complainant to collect the mobile set. When no telephonic call was received by the complainant from opposite party No.2, then after about three days, complainant personally approached opposite party No.3. The complainant was surprised to know that the opposite party had not taken the work in hand and the set was lying as it was in their office. Opposite party No.3 to pacify the complainant handed over another used mobile set IMEI No. 91143300556740/911433700809305 for the use of the complainant. They further assured the complainant that the mobile set of him will be returned shortly on receipt of part from opposite party No.1. Opposite party further told the complainant that they have obliged the complainant so he should not face inconvenience without the mobile set. Thereafter the complainant continuously remained in touch with opposite party No.3 for return of his original mobile set and every time false assurance was given to the complainant. On 9.12.2015 the second hand/used mobile set No. 91143300556740/911433700809305 given by the opposite party to the complainant for his use also started problem of hearing and became dead. The complainant approached opposite party again on 9.12.2015 and they received the mobile set against job sheet dated 9.2.2015 and returned the same after two/three days after removing the fault. When the complainant insisted for his own mobile set, the opposite party again assured that his set will be returned shortly. The complainant also made e-mail to opposite party No.1 but to no effect. Again on 4.1.2016 problem in the second hand/used mobile set again occurred and the set became dead . The complainant again approached opposite party No.3 and he received back the mobile hand set against job sheet dated 4.1.2016. The complainant is continuously going to the office of opposite party No.3 at Amritsar for return of his original mobile set , but they are evading the same with one excuse or the other. The mobile set model convas spark 0380 8GB ROM Black, IMEI No. 911429301014204/911429301115209 is lying with opposite party No.2 since 12.8.2015. But the opposite party is returning the same after removal of its defects inspite of lapse of period of about five months, which is clear cut deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. Before filing the present complaint, the complainant also served opposite parties legal notice dated 7.1.2016 through his counsel. But despite receipt of the legal notice, opposite parties have not returned the original mobile set to the complainant. Hence, this complaint.
2. Upon notice, opposite parties No.1 & 3 appeared through Sh.Ajay Shanker, Advocate on 8.3.2016. On 22.3.2016 Sh.Ajay Shanker,Advocate counsel for opposite party No. 1 suffered a statement that opposite party No.1 is ready to refund the price value of Rs. 5660/- of the mobile set in question subject to return of original bill, job sheet and any other accessories in the possession of the complainant/stand by mobile set, if any, in the possession of the complainant to the service centre within 15 days from that date.
3. At this juncture , the complainant stated that the complainant has filed the instant complaint after serving of legal notice through is counsel, but despite service of notice, opposite parties failed to redress the grievance of the complainant. The present complaint has been pending disposal since 1.2.2016 and counsel for opposite parties No.1 & 3 made appearance on 8.3.2016. Had the opposite parties been that genuine in accepting the claim of the complainant, they must have admitted his claim on the very first date of appearance. The complainant, as such, is not entitled to refund of the price of the mobile set only but he is also entitled to be granted compensation to satisfy his loss.
4. In our considered opinion, complainant is entitled to refund of Rs. 5660/- i.e. value of the mobile set in question subject to return of original bill, job sheet and any other accessory in the possession of the complainant/stand by mobile set, if any , in the possession of the complainant to the service centre . Besides that the complainant is also entitled to compensation to the tune of Rs. 1000/- only. Compliance of this order be made within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order ; ; failing which, amount awarded shall carry interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of order until full and final recovery . Copies of the orders be furnished to the parties free of costs. File is ordered to be consigned to the record room. Case could not be disposed of within the stipulated period due to heavy pendency of the cases in this Forum.
Announced in Open Forum
Dated : 8.4.2016
/R/ ( S.S.Panesar )
President
( Kulwant Kaur Bajwa) (Anoop Sharma)
Member Member
