BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM

VAZHUTHACAUD : THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

PRESENT

SHRI. P. SUDHIR                                :         PRESIDENT

SMT. SATHI. R                                   :         MEMBER

SMT. LIJU B. NAIR                            :         MEMBER

                                              C.C.No: 451/2015     Filed on 25/09/2015

                                            Dated: 30..09..2016

Complainant:

M. Vijayan, Kavalottukonam Kizhakkinkara Veedu, Puthuveedumele, Perukavu-P.O., Thiruvananthapuram – 695 573.

                    (Party in person)

Opposite parties:

1. Micromax Informatic Ltd., 21/14A Phase-II, Naraina Industrial Area, Delhi – 110 028.

2. The Manager, Connexion, TC 2/2442(9), 3^rd Floor, Menathottam Chambers, Pattom, Thiruvananthapuram – 695004.

3. Venus Mobiles, Mobile Accessories Sales & Services, 8/1705(8), opp. Ananthapuram Bank, Thirumala, Thiruvananthapuram.

This C.C having been heard on 30..08..2016, the Forum on 30..09..2016  delivered the following:

ORDER

SHRI. P. SUDHIR, PRESIDENT:

          Complainant’s case is that complainant purchased a Micromax X 2050 mobile for Rs. 1,000/- on 19/09/2015 from 3^rd opposite party. The mobile phone  as got one year warranty. Within two days from the date of purchase of the phone, the phone became defective. Complainant handed over the said phone to 2^nd opposite party, the authorised service centre. 2^nd opposite party assured a replacement of phone, but not done so far. Complainant approached this Forum for redressal.

2. Notice sent to opposite parties and the opposite parties not turned up and opposite parties set exparte.

          3. Issues:

(i) Whether there is deficiency of service or unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite parties?

          (ii) Whether the complainant is entitled for the relief sought for?

          4. Issues (i) & (ii):  Complainant filed chief examination affidavit and Exts. P1 & P2 marked. Since there is no contra evidence to look into we believe the statement of complainant and we are of the opinion that there is unfair trade practice and deficiency of service. There is no evidence for the amount paid to Autorickshaw and for loss of labour. Hence that part is not considered. We  directed the Opposite parties jointly and severally to refund Rs. 1,000/- being the cost of the mobile and Rs. 500/- towards compensation and cost.

          In the result, complaint is allowed and opposite parties are jointly and  severally liable to refund Rs. 1,000/- being the cost of the mobile and Rs. 500/- towards compensation and cost within one month from the date of receipt of this Order, failing which the entire amount carries interest @ 6% per annum from the date of default till realization.

           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 30^th day of September, 2016.

                    Sd/-P. SUDHIR     :         PRESIDENT

                              Sd/-R. SATHI        :         MEMBER

  Ad.                       Sd/-LIJU B. NAIR :         MEMBER

C.C.451/2015

APPENDIX

  I.  Complainant’s witness         :         NI L

 II.  Complainant’s documents:

          P1      :  Copy of the retail bill of Venus Mobiles dated 19/09/2015

P2      :  Copy of the Customer Information Slip of Micromax Care dated 21/09/2015

III.  Opposite parties’ witness              :         N I L

 IV. Opposite parties’ documents         :         N I L

Sd/-PRESIDENT

    Ad.