BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES

REDRESSAL FORUM, JALANDHAR.

Complaint No.71 of 2015

Date of Instt. 27.02.2015

Date of Decision :26.05.2015

Vicky son of Rajinder Pal R/o E.G.230 Bashir Pura, Jalandhar City.

..........Complainant

Versus

1. Mobile House H/o Chadha Mobile House Pvt Ltd, Phagwara Gate, Near Bhagat Singh Chowk, Jalandhar.

2. Harsehaj Communication, Opp.S.T.Hospital Near Football Chowk, Jalandhar.

3. Panasonic Pvt Ltd, H/o First Floor ABW Tower, IFFCO Chowk, Sector 25, Gurgaon 122001, Haryana , India.

.........Opposite parties

Complaint Under the Consumer Protection Act.

Before: S. Jaspal Singh Bhatia (President)

Ms. Jyotsna Thatai (Member)

Sh.Parminder Sharma (Member)

Present: Complainant in person.

Sh.Vishal Chaudhary Adv., counsel for OPs No.2 & 3.

Opposite party No.1 exparte.

Order

Jyotsna Thatai (Member)

1. The complainant has filed the present complaint under the Consumer Protection Act against the opposite parties on the averments that complainant purchased a mobile handset from opposite party No.1 on 26.2.2014 vide bill No.63819 for Rs.10,300/-. After 4-5 months of the purchase, there were some problem with the handset which was surrendered by him to the service centre and the service centre gave back the handset after one and half month but after one and half month, there was some defect in the handset and he again surrendered it to Panasonic service centre i.e opposite party No.2 on 12.12.2014 and till date he has no information about his mobile handset. He also sent emails to Panasonic Company twice but no satisfactory rely came from their side. On such like averments, the complainant has prayed for directing the opposite parties No.2 and 3 to either pay him the full price amount of the mobile handset with interest or to give him brand new mobile handset with full warranty. He has also claimed compensation.

2. Upon notice, opposite parties No.2 and 3 appeared and filed a written reply, inter-alia, pleading that as per the information and record available with the opposite parties, the complainant has purchased the handset on 26.2.2012 and from that date the handset was working properly and there was no fault in the handset but the complainant in order to harass and pressurize the opposite parties filed the present complaint. In fact the complainant firstly visited the office of opposite party No.2 on 12.12.2014 after the expiry of 10 months. It is mentioned that after the preliminary checking the engineer of the answering opposite parties told the complainant that he had not used the handset properly and due to the usage of the third party applications in the handset the said problem has occurred and the complainant was ever eager to book his handset and forced the answering opposite parties to change the handset as there was problem in the handset and for the satisfaction of the customer the answering opposite parties booked the handset and sent the same for repair to the head office and head office returned the same after the repair of the handset and which was received by the service centre and after that the service centre make various calls to the complainant to visit and collect the handset as the handset is ready for the delivery but the complainant did not turn back to receive the handset. They denied other material averments of the complainant.

3. Upon notice, opposite party No.1 did not appear and as such it was proceeded against exparte.

4. In support of his complaint, complainant has tendered into evidence affidavit Ex.CA alongwith copies of documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C7 and closed evidence

5. On the other hand, learned counsel for opposite parties No.2 & 3 has tendered affidavit Ex.OPW1/A and evidence of the opposite parties No.2 and 3 closed by order.

6. We have carefully gone through the record and also heard the complainant in person and learned counsel for the opposite parties No.2 and 3.

7. It is not disputed that complainant has purchased the mobile handset in question from opposite party No.1 vide retail invoice dated 26.2.2014 Ex.C1 for Rs.10,300/-. According to the complainant, 4/5 months after the purchase of the mobile handset, he gave it to service centre i.e opposite party No.2 and the service centre gave handset back to him after one and half month but the problem was still there in the handset. Further according to the complainant, he again gave his mobile handset to the service centre on 12.12.2014 and service centre issued job sheet Ex.C6. According to the complainant, service centre has not returned the mobile handset till date and he even sent emails to the company i.e opposite party No.3 but to no effect. The complainant has placed on record copies of emails Ex.C1 to C4. Ex.C5 is email sent by Panasonic Company to the complainant on 26.2.2015 wherein it is mentioned that handset of the complainant is under process with the concern department and they would try to resolve the same at the earliest. So this email clearly suggest that on 26.2.2015 the mobile handset has not been repaired. The present complaint was also filed on 26.2.2015. So version of the opposite parties No.2 and 3 that the handset is lying in fully repaired condition and complainant did not turn back to receive the same, can not be accepted. The opposite parties No.2 and 3 have not placed on record any letter or any written communication sent to the complainant mentioning that his mobile handset is ready and he may take the delivery of the same.

8. In view above discussion, the present complaint is partly accepted and opposite parties No.2 and 3 are directed to deliver the mobile handset of the complainant in fully repaired condition to him within 15 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order with fresh warranty of six months and for this purpose, the complainant shall approach opposite party No.2. In case the mobile handset can not be repaired then opposite parties No.2 and 3 are directed to replace the mobile handset of the complainant with new one of the same make and mode or to refund its price to him. The complainant is also awarded Rs.3000/- in lump sum on account of compensation and litigation expenses. Copies of the order be sent to the parties free of costs under rules. File be consigned to the record room.

Dated Parminder Sharma Jyotsna Thatai Jaspal Singh Bhatia

26.5.2015 Member Member President