Delhi

West Delhi

CC/15/296

MANPREET SINGH - Complainant(s)

Versus

MOBILITY WORLD - Opp.Party(s)

10 Aug 2015

ORDER

 CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM (WEST)

GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI

150-151, Community Centre, C-Block, Janak Puri, New Delhi – 110058

 

                                                                                     Date of institution           : 11.5.15

 

Case. No.DF-III/296/2015/                                                                     Date of order                : 22.4.16

In the matter of :-

Dr. Manpreet Singh Sahni,

S/o Shri, J.S. Sahni,

R/o L-1/A, 3^rd Floor,

Gali No.14, New Mahavir Nagar,

New Delhi-110018

Vs.

1.        Mobility World

            International Value Retail Pvt. Ltd.,

            Shop No.19 & 20, G. Floor, Plot No.6,

            Jaina Tower LL, Janakpuri Distt. Centre,

            New Delhi-110058.

 

2.        Pickme ESolutions India Pvt. Ltd.,

            2^nd Floor, A-one Complex,

            Jagmohan Compound, Near Hotal Ajit Palace,

            Dahisar Check Naka, Kashimira, Mira Road(E),

            Mumbai-401101.

 

3.        B.R. Services,

            C-30, Lajpat Nagar-II

            Lajpat Nagar, Near State Bank of India

            New Delhi-110024.

 

4.        Micromax Informatics Ltd.

            Plot No.90B, Sector-18,

            Gurgaon-122015                                                               Opposite Parties

 

 (R.S. BAGRI, PRESIDENT)

 

 

-2-

O R D E R  

            The brief facts of the present complaint as stated are that Dr.  Manpreet Singh, complainant on 26.6.14 purchased A-20 Micromax colours mobile handset from opposite party No.1 for sale consideration of Rs. 9915/-.   He also paid Rs. 599/- for  Pickme Protection Plan of opposite party No.2 for a period of one year to opposite party No.1 i.e.  Mobile World international  value retail Pvt. Ltd.

 

            The cell phone developed certain defects and opposite party No.2 was informed.   On 3.1.15, the representative of opposite party No.2 Sh. Ajit Singh collected the cell phone from the residence of the complainant and issued job sheet No. 3766/9968684490-2 .

 

            On 5.1.15, the representative of opposite party No.2 Sh. Ajit Singh telephonically intimated the complainant that the mobile handset is deposited for repairs  with opposite party No.3 at Lajpat Nagar, Delhi Micromax Service Centre vide job sheet No. 30756-0115-142875-23.

 

            On 17.1.15, Sh. Ajit Singh, representative of opposite party No.2 came to return the repaired handset but the handset was in bad condition with broken screen guard, scratches  and acid  leaking.   The same was shown to representative of opposite party No.2 and given back to him,  who assured  and promised to deliver a  the new handset at the earliest.

 

-3-

            The complainant through e-mails dated 17.1.15 and 19.1.15 informed the  opposite party No.2 with all the details but no response was received.    He approached the representative of opposite parties  No.2 & 3.  But they did not return the mobile handset.   On 20.1.15 complainant  telephonically called opposite party No.3.  But except assurances from opposite party No.3 till today handset is not returned.   Written complaint was made by complainant to opposite parties  No. 2 & 3 on 11.2.15 through registered Ad. He also handed over copy of the same to opposite party No.1 in person on 14.2.15. But to no effect.     On 4.3.15, the complainant sent legal notices to opposite parties requesting them to return the handset.  But they did not pay any heed to the request of complainant.  

           

            The opposite parties in  connivance with each other played fraud and wrongfully misappropriated the mobile handset.   The opposite parties  are jointly and severally liable for the act of omission and commission.   Hence, the present complaint is for direction to opposite parties to return the mobile handset and Rs. 1,00,000/- compensation for causing mental agony, pain and harassment.

 

            Notice of the complaint was sent to opposite parties.   But despite service none appeared on behalf of opposite parties.   The opposite parties  were proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 6.11.15.

 

 

-4-

            When the complainant was asked to lead ex-parte evidence and produce documents in support of his claim, he submitted his affidavit dated 28.1.16 with photocopy of invoice cum receipt of pickme protection plan dated 26.6.14, job sheet dated 3.1.15, copy of complaint dated 10.2.15 and copy of legal notice dated 4.3.15.    The complainant in his affidavit narrated the facts of the complaint and deposed that pickme protection plan  was taken for repairs, pick up  and return facility.    The official of opposite party No.2 collected the mobile handset of the complainant on 3.1.15 but did not return.

 

            From the perusal of the documents relied upon by the complainant it reveals that the complainant purchased mobile handset Canvas A-120 No. 911367103721503 vide invoice dated 26.6.14 for sale consideration of                   Rs. 9915/-.    He insured his mobile handset for pick up and return facility with opposite party No.2 by paying extra amount of Rs. 599/- to opposite party No.1.   We are constrained to observe that amount of mobile handset protection plan  are raised on invoice given by opposite party No.1 which shows amount of protection plan is collected by opposite party No.1.   The mobile handset  was picked up by official of opposite party No.2 on 3.1.15 for repairs and issued job sheet No. 3766/9968684490-2.  But till today mobile handset  is not returned.   He has suffered loss of the mobile handset.  He has also suffered harassment and mental agony.   He is also deprived of right to use the mobile handset.

 

 

-5-

            We have heard Dr. Manpreet Singh, complainant in person and gone through the complaint, affidavit dated 28.1.16 and documents relied upon by him carefully and thoroughly.

 

            The version of the complainant has remained un-rebutted and un-challenged.   There is no reason to disbelieve the affidavit of the complainant and documents relied upon by him.  The complainant from the affidavit and documents relied upon by him  has been able to show that he purchased  the mobile  handset for Rs. 9915/-  on 26.6.14 with pickme protection plan by paying extra amount of Rs. 599/- to opposite party No.1 on behalf of opposite party No.2 for pick up, repair and return facility.   The mobile handset  developed some faults.    The opposite party No.2 collected the mobile handset for repairs.     On 17.1.16, opposite party No.2 wanted to return the handset. The opposite party No.2 has delivered the mobile handset to opposite party No.3 for repairing.  Which was not  repaired. The complainant gave the mobile handset but till today the same is not return.

 

            Therefore, the complainant suffered loss of Rs. 9915/- cost of mobile handset and Rs. 599/- amount for pickme protection plan.   He has also suffered mental pain agony and harassment.   Therefore, there is deficiency in service  on the part of opposite parties No. 1 & 2.  The opposite parties No.1 & 2 are jointly and severally  liable for the acts of omission and commission.   The complainant is also entitled for compensation of Rs. 11,000/- on account of mental pain, agony and harassment suffered by him and loss of use of mobile in question.

-6-

            In the light of above discussion and observation the opposite parties No.1, 2 and 3 are jointly and severally liable for the acts of omissions and commissions.   Therefore, we direct the opposite parties No.1, 2 and 3 to pay a sum of Rs. 9915/- the cost of mobile handset and Rs. 599/- cost of protection  plan  totalling Rs. 10514/- with interest @ 9% P.A. from the date of filing of the complaint till actual realisation of the amount with compensation of Rs. 11000/- for mental pain, agony, harassment, legal expenses and loss of use of mobile handset for more than one year.

 

Order pronounced on   :  22.04.2016

 

• Compliance of the order be made within the 30 days after receipt of the order.
• Copy of the order be sent to the concerned parties free of cost.
• Thereafter, file be  consigned to record.

 

 

 

 

 

(PUNEET LAMBA)                               (URMILA GUPTA)                   ( R.S.  BAGRI )

  MEMBER                                            MEMBER                               PRESIDENT