Delhi

East Delhi

CC/1040/2014

MO.NASIR - Complainant(s)

Versus

MICROMAX - Opp.Party(s)

19 Nov 2015

ORDER

                         CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM, EAST, Govt of NCT Delhi

                  CONVENIENT SHOPPING CENTRE, 1^st FLOOR, SAINI ENCLAVE, DELHI 110092                                  

                                                                                                  Consumer complaint no.       1040 / 2014

                                                                                                  Date of Institution                  25/11/2014

                                                                                                  Order Reserved on                 10/01/2017

                                                                                                  Date of Order                          10/01/2017  In matter of

Mr  Nasir, adult   

S/o- Sh Mohd Rasheed

R/o  Hayat Nagar, opp. Asim Bihari School

Thana Katghar, Moradabad, UP…………………….……..…………….Complainant

                                                                  

                                                                     Vs

1 M/s D S Enterprises

A-31/103 D,  Road no. 66

Main Road, Maujpur

Delhi 110053

 

2 The Mobile Care 

B 36, Guru Nanak Pura,  opp. V 3 S Mall 

Nr Maharaja Banquet Hall Laxmi Nagar, Delhi 110092

 

3 Micromax Informatics Ltd. 

90 B, Sec 18

Gurgaon 122015 ……………………………………………..……………….Opponents

 

Complainant’s Advocate …………………Rajesh Sharma & Asso.   

Opponent 1& 2.……………………………….NEMO

Opponent 3 Advocate ..……………………Satya Vir Sharma

 

 

Quorum          Sh Sukhdev Singh      President

                         Dr P N Tiwari               Member                                                                                                   

                         Mrs Harpreet Kaur    Member

 

Order by Dr P N Tiwari  Member 

Brief Facts of the case                                    

Complainant purchased a Micromax mobile MT 500 vide invoice no 3679 IMEI no.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         911347850077841 from OP1 for a sum of Rs 10500/-on  dated  09/03/2014 marked  as  CW1/1.

 

 

Mobile started giving problem after one  month  of  its  purchase  as  power  did not switch off and mobile camera images were very bad, so visited authorized service centre OP2 on 12/03/2014, vide job sheet no. 060 and it was assured to return after 4-5 days. The said mobile was returned on 14/03/2014 as marked here as CW1/2.

After few days, same problem occurred, so mobile was taken to OP2 on dated 23/07/2014 vide job sheet no. N03066071411037381 and it was told to come after one month and tentative date was given for 13/09/2014, but mobile was delivered on 13/10/2014 as marked CW1/3.

The mobile again developed same problem and was deposited with OP2, but no job sheet was made and complainant visited number of times to OP2, but did not get his mobile back. When complainant did not get any satisfactory reply about his mobile, felt harassed and thus he filed this complaint claiming refund of cost of his mobile Rs 10,500/-with compensation Rs 50,000/- for mental and physical harassment. He also claimed Rs 15,000/- as cost of litigation. 

Notices were served. None appeared for OP1 & 2 and did not submit their written statement or evidences. So their stage was closed.

OP3 submitted their written statement and denying all the allegations of complainant. OP3 submitted that the said mobile was repaired under standard warranty and was timely delivered to the complainant. When complainant deposited his mobile on 23/07/2014 for repair, it was delivered on 13/10/2014 and was again deposited on the same day, but after repair, the same mobile was lying with OP2, but complainant did not come to take his mobile as marked here as RW1/1.  

Complainant filed his rejoinder and evidences on affidavit and affirmed that his mobile had manufacturing defect since it was purchased and within few days, working of camera and power switching got defective. Even after getting repaired by OP2, the same problem was existing.

Whereas OP3 submitted his version on affidavit through Mr Mohd Asad Shakeel, Manager Legal who submitted that the said mobile was timely repaired and had no defects. He supported the facts submitted in their written statement.

The case was listed for arguments, but OPs did not present on the date of arguments. Complainant’s arguments were heard, file perused and order was reserved

We have gone through all the facts and evidences on record, it was evident that the complainant had deposited his mobile with OP2 for repair, but did not get the same.  As mobile was under warranty and mobile was getting the same problem even after repeated repair by OP2, the mobile was not returned after deposited on third time. This clearly amounts deficiency of services by OP 2. Thus, complainant has succeeded in proving deficiency of OP2 who was an authorized service centre of OP3.

We come to the conclusion that this complaint has merit and the same deserve to be allowed with the following order—

1. OP 2 is directed to rectify the defects in the said mobile within 15 days from the date of receiving of this order and shall hand over the same in good working condition with one year warranty from the date of handing over mobile.
2. If OP2 fails in rectifying the defects in mobile, then OP2 and OP3 shall refund the cost of mobile a sum of Rs 10, 500/-with 9% interest from the date of filing this complaint till realized.   
3. We also award compensation of Rs 5500/- for mental and physical harassment. This amount shall include the litigation cost also.  
4. If order is not complied in time essence, entire awarded amount shall carry interest of 9% till realized.    

The copy of this order be sent to the parties as per rules and file be consigned to the record room.

 

Mrs  Harpreet Kaur                                                                                                       (Dr) P N Tiwari

Member                                                                                                                                     Member                                                                                    

                                                         Shri Sukhdev Singh

                                                                       President