THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KOZHIKODE.

C.C.222/2016

Dated this the 30^th day of December, 2017

(Smt. Rose Jose, B.Sc, LLB.              :  President)

                                               Smt.Beena Joseph, M.A.                     :  Member

                                                          Sri. Joseph Mathew, M.A., L.L.B.        :  Member

ORDER

Present: Joseph Mathew, Member:             

This petition is filed under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

Petitioner’s case is that, he had purchased one mobile phone from the 1^st opposite party shop manufactured by the 2^nd opposite party on 25/06/2015 for Rs.4,000/-. The mobile is having one year warranty. But after 3 months of its purchase it became defective. It was not charging. When he took it to the 1^st opposite party and informed the matter, they send it to their service centre for rectification. After a long lapse of two months, the service centre returned the phone saying that the defect is rectified. But when he checked the phone it is found that the defect is persisting. Again he entrusted the phone with the 1^st opposite party and they send it for servicing further. After one month they returned the phone saying that they could not rectify the defects as he had repaired it from outside.

The petitioner stated that actually he has not given it anywhere for repair as alleged by the opposite parties. Even after telling the truth and repeated request, the opposite parties have not cared to listen him or to rectify the defects of the phone. Now the set became useless and this caused much mental pain and other inconveniences to him. Since the complaint started within the warranty period, the opposite parties are bound either to replace the defective phone with a defect free new one or to refund its purchase price along with compensation for his sufferings. The indifferent attitude of the opposite parties towards his genuine demand amounts to unfair trade practice and also deficiency in service on their part. Hence this petition seeking reliefs.

The opposite parties received the notice issued from this Forum but they didn’t turn up or filed version. Hence they set ex-parte.

The petitioner filed affidavit in lieu of his petition and produced the copy of the purchase bill issued by the 1^st opposite party dated 25/06/2015 for Rs.4,000/- and the copy of the warranty card in support of his averments and these are marked as Ext.s A1 and A2.

The petitioner averred that the mobile phone purchased from the 1^st opposite party manufactured by the 2^nd opposite party was defective. It was not charging. Even after two times of repairs the opposite party could not rectify the defects and due to its defect the phone became useless. Since the complaint occurred within the warranty period, they are bound to replace it with a new one or to refund its purchase price. But even after repeated demands they are not ready to do so. This is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. Ext. A1 and A2 support the averments of the petitioner. The opposite parties didn’t file version or adduced any evidence to disprove the averments of the petitioner or to rebut the validity of the documents produced and marked on the side of the petitioner. Hence the case of the petitioner stands unchallenged and proved.

Considering the facts stated and evidence on record, we are also of the opinion that the said act of the opposite parties amounts to deficiency in service on their part.

Hence the following order is passed.

The opposite parties are jointly and severally ordered to refund the purchase price of the mobile phone Rs.4,000/- (Rupees four thousand only) along with Rs.1,500/- Rupees one thousand five hundred only) as cost of the proceedings to the petitioner within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order. The opposite parties can take back the defective phone from the petitioner on payment of the ordered amount.

Dated this the 30^th day of December, 2017

Date of filing: 17/05/2016

SD/-MEMBER                          SD/-PRESIDENT                SD/-MEMBER

 APPENDIX

Documents exhibited for the complainant:

A1. Copy of the purchase bill dated 25/06/2015

A2. Copy of warranty card

Documents exhibited for the opposite party:

Nil

Witness examined for the complainant:

None

Witness examined for the opposite party:

None                                                           

Sd/-President

//True copy//

(Forwarded/By Order)

SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT