IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KOTTAYAM

Dated, the 28^th day of June, 2024

Present:  Sri. Manulal V.S. President

 Sri. K.M. Anto, Member

C C No. 455/2023 (Filed on 29.12.2023)

ORDER

Sri. K.M. Anto, Member

The complaint is filed under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act 2019.

The brief of the complainant’s case is as follows. The complainant purchased a Samsung F23 Mobile phone from the Website of the second opposite party on 12.11.2022 for an amount of ₹15,649/-. The phone was delivered to the complainant on 15.11.2022. The mobile phone was given to the first opposite party for repair due to overheating. The first and second opposite parties had given a coupon worth ₹15,649/- on 17.12.2022.

The complainant purchased a Samsung Galaxy A23 mobile phone on 26.12.2022 from the Samsung Cafe, Kochi by paying ₹3, 850/- in addition to the coupon. The second opposite party offered a warranty of one year for the new phone. On using the mobile phone it was found that the phone is getting over heated and battery charge became drained out immediately after charging. A complaint was given to the second opposite party on 31.12.2022. The mobile phone was given to the authorized service center at Nagercoil on 06.01.2023. On examination the third opposite party informed that there is a bent for the phone. The complainant contacted the second and third opposite party several times and they demanded ₹7592/- for the repair as there is no warranty for the said phone. The opposite parties are bound to repair the mobile phone under warranty or to refund cost. The act of the opposite parties in not giving the refund for the defective phones is unfair trade practice on their part.

This complaint is filed to get the refund of the cost of ₹19,499/- with 18% interest from 26.12.2022 and to get a compensation of ₹1,50,000/- for the financial loss in his official duty along with a compensation of ₹5,000/- for the unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite parties with cost ₹10,000/-.

On admission of the complaint, copy of the complaint was served to the opposite parties. The first opposite party was deleted from the party array on the application of the complainant. The second and third opposite parties failed to file their version within the stipulated time or to appear before the commission to defend their case. The second and third opposite parties were set exparte. (The second opposite party appeared before the commission on 30/01/2024, but failed to file their version even on 26/03/2024, the second opposite party was set exparte. Despite getting notice from this commission the third opposite party neither filed their version nor appeared before the commission to defend their case. The third opposite party was set expate. The first opposite party was deleted from the party array on the application of the complainant.) The complainant filed proof affidavit and marked documents Exhibit A1 to A6.

On the basis of the complaint and evidence adduced we would like to consider the following points.

1. Whether there is deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite parties.
2. If so what are the reliefs and costs?

Point Nos. 1&2

On going through the complaint and evidence on record it is clear that the complainant purchased a Samsung F23 Mobile phone from the second opposite party on 12.11.2022 for an amount of ₹15,649/-.  The mobile phone was given to the first opposite party for repair due to overheating. The first and second opposite parties had given a coupon worth ₹15,649/- on 17.12.2022 as a refund for the said phone.

The complainant then purchased a Samsung Galaxy A23 mobile phone on 26.12.2022 from the Samsung Cafe, Kochi on payment of         ₹3,850/- in addition to the coupon. Ext A1 is the Tax Invoice dated 12.11.2022 issued to the complainant for the Mobile phone having Material code. SM-E236BZGHINS, Product Serial No IMEI No.351940690934536 for an amount of Rs 15,649/-. Ext A2 is the bill for the acknowledgement of service request issued by the first opposite party on 25.11.2022 for the mobile phone having Model Name SM-E236BZGHINS and IMEI No. *******0934536. In Ext A2 the warranty is given as full warranty.  Ext A3 Bill for the purchase of Samsung Galaxy A23, having batch No.357688955115887 for a total amount of ₹19,499/- issued by the Samsung Smart Cafe, Cochin on 26.12.2022. Ext A5 is the acknowledgement of service request issued by the third opposite party on 06.01.2023.  The purchase date of the mobile is given as 26.12.2022 and model name is SM-A235FZKHINS, Serial No (CRT/ESN/IMEI) No. ****5115887.  The defects noted by the third opposite party are charge drain out fast, mobile heating while using.

          On going through Ext A5 it is evident that the third opposite party declined to provide service to the mobile phone under warranty. The reason for not providing warranty for the mobile phone purchased on 26.12.2022 is not mentioned in Ext A5. The act of the second and third opposite parties in not rectifying the defects of the mobile phone having model name is SM-A235FZKHINS, Serial No (CRT/ESN/IMEI) No. ****5115887, under warranty is an act of imperfection, shortcoming in the quality, nature and manner of performance which is required to be maintained by the opposite parties and amounts to deficiency in service as per Consumer Protection Act 2019.

The opposite parties failed to appear before the commission and to adduce any evidence. In the absence of any contrary evidence we are inclined to allow the complaint. The complaint is allowed and we pass the following orders.

1. The second and third opposite parties are directed to rectify the defects of the mobile phone having model name is SM-A235FZKHINS, Serial No (CRT/ESN/IMEI) No. ****5115887 to a perfect working condition, free of coast within 30 days from the date of receipt of the copy of this order, Failing which the second and third opposite parties are directed to refund ₹19,499/- to the complainant with 9% interest from the date of order till realization.
2. The second and third opposite parties are directed to give ₹ 5,000/- as compensation for the mental agony and sufferings of the complainant.
3. The second and third opposite parties are directed to give ₹2,000/- as cost for this litigation.

The order shall be complied within 30 days from the date of receipt of the copy of this order, If not complied as directed the compensation amount shall carry 9% interest p.a from the date of order till realization.  

Pronounced in the Open Commission on this the 28^th day of June, 2024

   Sri.K.M.Anto, Member     Sd/-        

  Manulal V.S, President      Sd/-

APPENDIX :

Exhibits from the side of the Complainant :

A1     -  Copy of the purchase bill of mobile phone dated 12.11.2022

A2     -  Copy of the service request bill dated 25.11.2022.

A3     -  Copy of the purchase bill of mobile phone dated 26.12.2022.

A4      -  Copy of the warranty card

A5      - Copy of the bill no. 4362907478 dated 06.01.2023

A6     -  Copy of the identity card of Mathew T Thomas.

Exhibits from the side of the Opposite Parties : Nil    

                                                                                                                                              By Order,

                                                                                                                                        Assistant Registrar