Delhi

East Delhi

CC/980/2014

SH. RAMEAZ SIDDIQUI - Complainant(s)

Versus

MICROMAX - Opp.Party(s)

19 Nov 2015

ORDER

                 DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM, EAST, Govt of NCT Delhi

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

                                                                                                  Consumer complaint no.         980 / 2014

                                                                                                  Date of Institution                  28/11/2014

                                                                                                  Order Reserved on                 09/01/2017

                                                                                                  Date of Order                          10/01/2017  In matter of

Mr Rameez Siddiqui, adult   

R/o  284/C, Ramesh Park

Laxmi Nagar, Delhi 110092………………………………….……..…………….Complainant

                                                                  

                                                                     Vs

1 M/s Micromax Informatics Ltd. 

21/14A, Phase II,

Naraina Industrial area, Delhi 110028

 

2-Sh Sanjeev Kapoor, Chairman

21/14A, Phase II,

Naraina Industrial area, Delhi 110028

 

3-Sh Vikas Jaiswal

M/s The Mobile Care 

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

Nr Maharaja Banquet Hall Laxmi Nagar, Delhi 110092

 

4-Sh Manish Pant, Manager,

M/s The Mobile Care 

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

Nr Maharaja Banquet Hall Laxmi Nagar, Delhi 110092

 

5-M/s The New Mobile Mart

R 52, Vikas Marg, Shakarpur

Nr Metro Pillor 44, delhi 110092 ……………..……………………..………….Opponents

 

Complainant’s Advocate …………………Suhail A Siddiqui   

Opponent 1&2…………………………………Satya Veer Sharma

Opponent 3 to 5..…………………………….Nemo

 

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 aged about 24 years stated that he was an actor and director of professional films at Mumbai, had purchased a Micromax mobile phone from OP4 vide IMEI no. 911334850657611 for a sum of Rs 14,000/-on dated 31/12/2013 vide cash memo no. 5951 marked as Ex CW1/1. Mobile phone developed some touch screen problem from 20/08/2014 and mobile was deposited with OP3 as service centre on dated 15/09/2014 vide job sheet no. N030666-0914-12200214 marked here as Ex CW1/ 2. OP3 reported problem of Display touch screen not working. The mobile was under warranty when it was deposited with OP3. OP3 assured to return the mobile after rectifying the defects in 10-15 days (by 30/09/2014).

Complainant stated that he booked a train ticket for Mumbai for 09/10/2014 for his work as marked Ex CW1/3 and cancelled the ticket on 07/10/2014 and Rs 282/ were deducted as marked Ex CW1/4. It was due to non delivery of mobile in time by OP3.

Complainant stated that this mobile phone was the only source of connectivity with family. As OP3 had not returned the mobile as per stated time, so lodged his complaint to OP 1, 2 and 4, but none gave reply. Due to callous attitude of OP3, complainant suffered heavy financial loss by loosing film contract and production of documentary film to a sum of Rs 9,75,000/-as marked here CW1/5&6.

It was also stated that complainant suffered a loss of Rs 282/- in train ticket cancellation and paying counsel’s fee a sum of Rs 33,000/-. Hence, filed this complaint and claimed a sum of Rs 19,83,782/ from OPs with replacement of his mobile having same features and warranty also.  

Notices were served. None of OP 3, 4 and 5 put their appearance. By tracking report from postal department, the notices were served and deemed to be served. Despite of serving notices, none were present till the date of argument and not submitted their written statement or evidence.

OP1 and 2 jointly submitted their written statement and denied all the allegations put by the complainant. It was admitted that the said mobile was purchased on 31/12/2013 and was working well for over eight months. The said mobile was deposited with OP3 on 15/09/2014 and was repaired in time and was communicated to complainant for collecting his mobile, but complainant insisted for replacing with new mobile, thus it was lying with OP3.

 

It was also stated that the service centre/OP3 had repaired the mobile as per standard warranty terms and conditions which were applicable on their products given by the manufacturer. OP 1 & 2 denied all the allegations put by the complainant as ambiguous and equivocal and misconceived facts without any iota of evidence, hence the complaint may be dismissed with cost.  

Complainant filed his rejoinder with evidence on affidavit and OP1 and 2 also filed their evidences jointly on affidavit which were on record.

Arguments were heard from both the counsels 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 OP3 for repair, but did not get the same. The mobile was under warranty and was repaired by OP3, but complainant did not take the mobile and he was demanding for replacement with a new mobile. It was also evident that complainant had used the said mobile without any defect for over 08 months.

As far as financial loss claimed by complainant, we have seen that complainant who was aged about 24 years stated himself as a professional film actor and director in film industry and booked ticket in Garib Rath train from Old Delhi to Mumbai has no evidence in this fact on record, so does not carry merit. The ticket was booked on 23/09/2014 for 09/10/2014 and the same was cancelled on 07/10/2014 as Ex CW1/3 and 4.

We have perused all the mail received from Mr Jasbir B Bhati, film and TV director dated 17/10/2014 showing that the complainant was assisting in the making of documentary films and was ignoring warnings from directors from 18/08/2014. Due to his callous attitude, director had a telephonic talk on 07/09/2014 and asked him to come by 10/09/2014, but complainant did not reach office, whereas by perusing the Ex CW1/3 and 4, it is clearly evident that complainant had booked ticket on 23/09/2014 for 09/10/2014 and cancelled his ticket on 07/10/2014 for the reason best known to him. Whereas he had to be in his office at Mumbai by 10/09/2014.

Similarly we have also gone through annexure CW1/6 email dated 17/10/2014 sent by another film and TV director which reads as –

 

                                  “in the recent time your ignorance and lack of seriousness towards writing and production of films “Lo Kallo Pyaar” has cost us dearly with time and money both, in accordance to our conversation you were supposed to be in Mumbai as soon as shooting of your earlier project would end. And the same would have been finished by 12/08/2014 as confirmed by the production house under the name of Dhanraj Films Pvt Ltd. It is 15^th Oct 2014 and approximately over one month has passed by now, so we are entitled to take action against you. We now remove you  from the position of screen play writer and also remove you from the position of Associate director too for non cooperation for film production and your name will be filed in IMPPA (India Motion Pictures Produces Association) due to lack of professionalism and commitment towards the project.”

This email itself proves the working attitude of complainant towards his work. It has also been a point of consideration for us whether complainant was totally dependent on the said mobile, which had developed defects after using it for over 08 months and could not have another means of connectivity in 2014 considering his stated position as film director. It cannot be presumed that complainant had only one mobile phone and financial loss occurred due to non delivery of mobile by OP3. More so, complainant had not produced any evidence for cancelling his ticket by train when he knew that his presence was utmost important at his work place where he had to complete his work. The date of booking train ticket was 23/09/2014 and subsequently cancelling the ticket on 07/10/2014 does not prove any deficiency of OP3. There was no evidence that he had to join the duty on 09/10/2010.

It has also noted that the said mobile had touch screen display problem from 20/08/2014 and the same was deposited with OP3/service centre on 15/09/2014 meaning thereby he could not use his mobile for over 25 days, and email dated 17/10/2014 as Ex CW1/5 showed that he had telephonic conversation on 07/09/2014 for his work by 10/09/2014 at Mumbai. This showed that such issues had no relevance with his mobile and clearly proves complainant’s negligence toward his work.

It has also been observed that complainant had mislead the Forum by quoting the wrong name of so called film YUVA which is wrong. It was Uva as seen from the emails detail.

 

As film YUVA was produced and written by Mr Maniratanam, a famous film director and producer much earlier to the dated shown in his complaint. Also there was no evidence that complainant had paid counsel’s fee of Rs 33,000/-. As such this complaint is devoid of any merit in proving deficiency of OPs by single evidence.

Considering all the facts on merit, we pass the following order—

1. Complainant is directed to collect his mobile from OP3/service centre within 30 days.
2. OP3 shall hand over the said mobile in working condition to the complainant.
3. OP1 shall extend the warranty for another four months from the date of handing over the said mobile.
4. We also put cost of a sum of Rs 5000/-on complainant for putting wrong facts before the Forum.

The awarded amount shall be deposited in the Consumer legal account of this Forum within 30 days from the receiving of this order.        

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

(Dr) P N Tiwari  Member                                                                             Mrs  Harpreet Kaur Member                                                                                   

                                                  

                                                      Shri Sukhdev Singh President