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: 531/2015     Filed on 09/11/2015 

                                            Dated: 15..07..2016

Complainant:

Sivakumar. S., TC.14/1421, Vigneswara Nagar, Vazhuthacaud, Palayam Ward, Thycud-P.O., Thiruvananthapuram – 695 014.

                    (Party in person)

Opposite parties:

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

2. Pothys Life Style, TC.28/2477-7, M.G. Road, Thiruvananthapurm – 695 001.

3. M/s. Connexion, TC. 20/2442(9), 3^rd Floor, Menathottama Chambers, Pattom, Thiruvananthapuram – 695 004.

This C.C having been heard on 02..06..2016, the Forum on 15..07..2016  delivered the following:

ORDER

SMT. LIJU B. NAIR, MEMBER:

          Gist of the case is as follows:  Complainant purchased a Micromax mobile handset for an amount of Rs. 4,200/- from the 2^nd opposite party. It was manufactured by 1^st opposite party and 3^rd opposite party is the authorised service centre of 1^st opposite party. On July 2015 he faced some problems with the handset and he gave the set to 3^rd opposite party for repair. It was returned to him without any rectification. So when he questioned this, 3^rd opposite party took back the set again and asked him to come back after a month.  But till now the set is with them and so he claimed for refund along with compensation.

          2. Notice was issued to the opposite parties, they failed to appear and they were set exparte. Complainant filed affidavit along with 2 documents which were marked as Exts. P1 & P2. Wherein Ext. P1 is bill for purchase and Ext. P2 is the job sheet issued by the 3^rd opposite party.

          Points:

          (i) Whether the allegations against opposite parties are proved?

          (ii) If so, relief and cost, if any?

          3. Points (i) & (ii):  Complainant approached this Forum claiming compensation for the mobile phone given for the repair which was not returned till now. Since the opposite parties are not contesting the case we have no other option rather than to allow the complaint.

          In the result, the complaint is allowed. Opposite parties are jointly and severally liable to pay the complainant Rs. 4,200/- along with Rs. 2,000/- as compensation within a month of receipt of this order, failing which Rs. 4,200/- will carry interest at the rate of 9% till the date of realisation.      

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 15^th day of July, 2016.

                   Sd/- LIJU B. NAIR :         MEMBER

 Sd/-P. SUDHIR             :         PRESIDENT

Ad                          sd/-R. SATHI                  :         MEMBER

C.C.No: 531/2015

APPENDIX

   I.  Complainant’s witness        :         N I L

 II.  Complainant’s documents:

          P1      :  Copy of the invoice bill dated 17/12/2014

          P2      :  Copy of the job sheet dated 26/10/2015 of M/s. Connxion

III. Opposite parties’ witness               :         N I L

 IV. Opposite parties’ documents         :         N I L

Sd/- PRESIDENT

  ad