Jharkhand

Bokaro

CC/18/62

Dinesh Prasad Sahu - Complainant(s)

Versus

Motorala Mobility India Pvt. ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

18 Mar 2019

ORDER

Complainant Dinesh Prasad Sahu filed this case for a claim of Rs. 13,998/- with 18 % interst per annum and litigation cost of Rs. 20,000/-

2          The  complainant case is that he purchased a mobile phone Lenovo K8  Note Model No- XT 1902-3, colour Venom black from Amazon platform through Motorola Mobility India Pvt. Ltd. on 25-09-2017 on payment of Rs. 13998/- mobile phone was delivered to the complainant with order No. 40355715337295543 and payment was made by cash.

            After some time the phone becomes too hot without using and battery back did not  last for 5-6 hours in continuous even 4000 MAH complainant took the phone to service centre who after software update returned and told that problem has been solved. However, the problem of heating existed. During this period, the phone got some scratches on the screen. When again the phone was produced before the service centre the insisted to change the screen although phone was under warranty.

            Complainant sent a e-mail and also lodged complaint on PG Portal. gov. in but O.P. did not respond.

            This is a deficiency in service and O.P. is liable for the claim.

3          Complainant has filed following documents:-

            Anx-1-  Copy of the Tax-invoice of bill dt. 25-08-2017.

            Anx-2 Copy of Lenovo service order dt. 27-12/2017.

            Anx-3 & 3/1 Copy of warranty

            Anx-4- Copy of On line complaint  to Lenovo- Motorola Customer

                        Support

            Anx-5- Copy of complaint to CPGR AMS on consumer affairs portal

                        of the Government.

4          O.P. No.1 Motorola Mobility India Pvt. Ltd. did not appear, the manufacture of the phone inspite of notice served. Hence ex-parte proceeding has been initiated.

5          O.P. No.2 Newtech Service JKH has appeared but did not filed W.S. and as such O.P. has been debarred form filing written statement.

FINDINGS

6          We perused the record and the documents. Complaint purchased the phone on payment. Hence he is a Consumer and the dispute is consumer dispute.

7          Anx-1, the tax invoice of the purchase, shows that the order of purchase was placed online on the platform of Amazon.in by Racket Kommerce LLP. The billing and shipping address is of Dhanbad district. However, the service centre is at Bokaro so part of cause of action arose at Bokaro, hence part cause of action arose at Bokaro, therefore this forum has territorial jurisdiction to entertain the case.

8          Anx-2 , the receipt of service order of Lenovo at Bokaro entertained the complaint of overheating Battery backup. Anx-3 is the warranty and the phone was within warranty period.

9          Anx-4- is the On line complaint of the phone to through e-mail to Lenovo- Motorola Customer service and Anx-5 is the official complaint on Government portal of Consumer Affairs. Of the Central Govt.

10       From perusal of the document, it is clear that O.P. No.1 the manufacturing of the phone has not redversed the complain of the complainant and O.P. No.2 the Service centre has also illegally compelling the Complainant to change the screen. All these shows that O.Ps are liable for deficiency in service.

11       Therefore, we allow the claim of the complainant and direct O.P. No.1 M/s Motorola Mobility India Pvt. Ltd. to pay Rs. 13998/- to the complaint on return of the phone.

            We further direct O.P. No.1 to pay compensation of Rs. 3000/- for mental agony and litigation cost of Rs. 1000/-. All payment not be paid within 45 days of this order failure 10% interest will be liable on the cost of the phone till realisation.

            Let a copy of this order be sent to O.P. No.1 at the cost of this complainant.