BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM

VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

PRESENT

SRI. P. SUDHIR                                       :  PRESIDENT

SMT. R. SATHI                                         :  MEMBER

SMT. LIJU B. NAIR                                  : MEMBER

C.C. No. 512/2016 Filed on 22.10.2016

ORDER DATED: 01.12.2017

Complainant:

Biju. K.B, Kamalalayam, Thidi, Nirathupara P.O, Koodal, Pathanamthitta-689 693.

                                   (Party in person)              

Opposite parties:

1. Manager, Micromax Informatics Ltd., Head Office, Micro Max House 90 b, Sector 18, Gurgaon, Haryana-122015.

(By Adv. K.S. Vijaya Kumar)

2. Manager, M/s Connexion, T.C 202442(9), 3^rd Floor, Menathottam Chambers, Pattom, Thiruvananthapuram-695 004.

3. Manager, M/s Pothys Life Style, C 28/2477, M.G. Road, Ayurveda College Junction, Thiruvananthapuram-695 001.

This case having been heard on 12.10.2017, the Forum on 01.12.2017 delivered the following:

ORDER

SMT. LIJU B. NAIR: MEMBER

Case of the complainant is as follows:  Complainant purchased a mobile handset from 3^rd opposite party manufactured by the 1^st opposite party on 26.08.2014 for Rs. 19,047/-.  After using it for 1½ years it became defective and so it was entrusted with the 2^nd opposite party for repair.  They promised him to get it repaired within a week.  When he went there for taking it back, he was informed that since the spare parts are not available some more time is needed to get it rectified.  From that day onwards he was regularly visiting the 2^nd opposite party for taking back the handset.  But it was not returned till now.  Being a native of Pathanamthitta and presently working in Trivandrum, he finds it very difficult for regular communication even with his native house.  So he prays for refund of purchase price along with compensation and cost.

Notice was accepted by opposite party and they even filed vakalath.  They came forward with the suggestion to refund the purchase price as a settlement, for which the complainant readily agreed.  But after that opposite party evaded from the scene even without filing version and so we proceeded in their absence.  

Issues:

1. Is there any deficiency in service on the part of opposite party?
2. Reliefs and costs if any?

Issues (i) & (ii):- Complainant filed affidavit along with 2 documents which were marked as Ext. P1 and P2.  These documents were not challenged by the opposite parties.  We are allowing the complaint.  The purpose for which the handset was purchased was not served and so he is eligible to get compensation which we fix as Rs. 3,000/-.  No order on cost.

In the result, complaint is allowed.  Opposite parties are jointly and severally ordered to refund Rs. 19,047/- (Rupees Nineteen Thousand and Forty Seven only) along with Rs. 3,000/- (Rupees Three Thousand only) as compensation within 2 months of receipt of this order failing which Rs. 22,047/- (Rs. 19,047/- + Rs. 3,000/-) will carry interest @ 9% from the date of default till realization.  No order on cost.

A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties free of charge and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room. 

          Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Forum, this the 1^st day of December 2017.

Sd/-

LIJU B. NAIR                        : MEMBER

 Sd/-

P. SUDHIR                            : PRESIDENT

Sd/-

                        R. SATHI                               : MEMBER

jb

C.C. No. 512/2016

APPENDIX

  I      COMPLAINANT’S WITNESS:

                             NIL

II       COMPLAINANT’S DOCUMENTS:

P1     - Copy of invoice dated 26.08.2014

P2     - Copy of job sheet dated 07.06.2016

III      OPPOSITE PARTY’S WITNESS:

                             NIL

 IV     OPPOSITE PARTY’S DOCUMENTS:

                             NIL

                                                                                                      Sd/-

PRESIDENT

jb