IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KOLLAM
Dated this the 20th Day of January 2023
Present: - Smt.S.Sandhya Rani, Bsc, L.L.B,President(I/C)
Sri.Stanly Harold, B.A.LLB, Member
CC.192/2022
Anas.B : Complainant
Ashik Manzil
SH Nagar 214 B
Thattamala PO
Kollam-691020.
V/s
Midhun : Opposite party
New SN Mobiles
STR Buildings
Main Road, Kollam-691001.
[By Adv.Lissa.S]
FINAL ORDER
S.SANDHYA RANI, B Sc, LLB, PRESIDENT(I/C)
The complainant is a degree student. He had a mobile phone Narzo 10 of Realme company and when the display of the phone was broken on 02.06.2022, he has approached the opposite party Midhun who is running a mobile shop named New SN Mobiles at Chinnakkada, Kollam. When the complainant approached the opposite party for repairing the phone, the opposite party made the complainant believe that he is having direct access with Realme company and the original spare parts of Realme are with him and all the repair works would be done by him with the original spares of Realme only etc. By believing the words of opposite party, the complainant entrusted his damaged phone with opposite party and after repair works the opposite party returned the mobile phone to the complainant after receiving Rs.3400/- by way of repairing charges. But when the complainant examined the repaired phone, he could realize that instead of replacing the broken display with a new display of Realme company the opposite party has replaced the same with a duplicate display moreover the side button of the phone was bended and due to that bending the phone became completely worthless. Thereafter when the complainant approached the opposite party and made complaint of the above defects instead of rectifying the defects the opposite party has returned Rs.450/- to the complainant by commenting that this type of damages may occur while repairing mobile phones. According to the complainant all his class notes and assignments were written using the alleged mobile phone and who had earned money for purchasing and repairing the subject matter mobile phone by way of working as delivery boy in swiggy online delivery system. Even after repeated requests the opposite party didn’t take any initiative to rectify the defects occurred while repairing the alleged mobile phone of the complainant. According to the complainant the above mentioned acts on the part of opposite party amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice which caused much mental agony apart from financial loss to the complainant. In the circumstances the complainant claims Rs.25000/- by way of compensation for mental agony and financial loss and Rs.2000/- as costs of the proceedings. Hence the complaint.
Though notice issued from CDRC, Kollam was received by the opposite party he has not appeared before the commission hence opposite party is set exparte. Complainant filed chief affidavit by reiterating the averments in the complaint and got marked Ext.P1 and P2 documents. Heard the counsel for the complainant and perused the records. Ext.P1 is a photo of side button view of the defective phone. Ext.P2 is receipt dated 02.06.2022 issued by the opposite party shop for Rs.3400/-.
The unchallenged averments coupled with Ext.P1 and P2 documents would establish the case of the complaint. In view of Ext.P2 receipt issued by the New S.N.Mobiles sales and service, STR Building, Main Road, Kollam, it is evident that the opposite party has received Rs.3400/- from the complainant on 02.06.2022 by way of repairing charges. But when the complainant examined the repaired mobile phone he could realized that the broken display of the alleged mobile phone is replaced with a used display and the side button of the phone is bended also. Even after repeated request the opposite party didn’t rectify none of the defects but the opposite party has returned Rs.450/- to the complainant by stating that causing damages to mobile phones are so common while repairing mobile phones and such a comment is not tenable with respect to the complainant because who had paid Rs.3400/- by way of repair charges.
It is pertinent to note that when the alleged mobile phone was entrusted with opposite party it was having only one defect that the display was broken but when the same was returned after repair works it is seen that the display is replaced not with a good one of the same brand but with a duplicate one and the side button of the phone is also bended which happened while repairing the mobile phone by the opposite party which would indicate that the opposite party has acted in most negligent manner while dealing with the defective phone of the complainant.
Further more it is clearly envisaged in Ext.P2 receipt issued by opposite party that they shall not be responsible if the equipment is damaged/broken in the event of testing/repairing/servicing by their technicians as such damages are unavoidable in certain circumstances. In the circumstances the opposite party is bound to reveal whether there were existed any such unavoidable situation which caused damage to the alleged mobile phone of the complainant. But the opposite party didn’t appeared before this Commission and filed version evidencing any such unavoidable situation has happened while repairing the alleged mobile phone of the complainant even after accepting notice issued from this Commission. In the absence of such an explanation from the part of opposite party would indicate that there existed any such unavoidable circumstance to cause more damages with the mobile phone of the complainant.
It is true that due to the malfunctioning of the alleged mobile phone the complainant has lost the very purpose of purchase of the same, that he couldn’t write down the class notes and assignments by using his phone which caused much mental agony apart from financial loss to the complainant . The above mentioned acts on the part of opposite party purely amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice.
On evaluating the entire materials discussed above we are of the view that there exists deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of opposite party. In the circumstances the opposite party is directed to refund the balance amount of Rs.2950/- to the complainant which is received by the opposite party by way of repairing charges and also directed to pay compensation and costs to the complainant.
In the result the complaint stands allowed in the following terms.
- Opposite party is directed to refund Rs.2950/- to the complainant received by the opposite party by way of repairing charges and also directed to pay Rs.1500/- as compensation for mental agony and financial loss caused to the complainant.
- Opposite party is directed to pay Rs.1000/- as costs of the proceedings.
- Opposite party is directed to comply with the above directions within 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order failing which the complainant is entitled to realize the amount of Rs.4450/- along with interest @9% p.a from the date of complaint till realization along with costs Rs.1000/- from opposite party and from his assets.
Dictated to the Confidential AssistantSmt. Deepa.S transcribed and typed by her corrected by me and pronounced in theOpen Commission this the20thday ofJanauary 2023.
S.Sandhya Rani:Sd/-
Stanly Harold:Sd/-
Forwarded/by Order
Senior Superintendent
INDEX
Witnesses Examined for the Complainant:-Nil
Documents marked for the complainant
Ext P1: Photo copy of side button view of the defective phone.
Ext P2: Ext.P2 is receipt dated 02.06.2022 issued by the opposite party shop
for Rs.3400/-.
Witnesses Examined for the opposite party:-Nil
Documents marked for the opposite party:-Nil
