DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, GURGAON-122001
Consumer Complaint No: 167 of 2015 Date of Institution: 07.04.2015 Date of Decision: 11.02.2016.
Pawan Kumar s/o Sh. Tek Chand, R/o 260/21, Opp. Durga Shakti Mandir, Basai Road, Gurgaon.
……Complainant.
Versus
M/s Ansh Communication Services, Old Delhi Road, Opp. Air Force School, Gurgaon through its authorized person/proprietor.
M/s Royal Green Services (P) Ltd, 212-B, 3rd Floor, Street No.2, Vaishali, Dabri, New Delhi-110045.
..Opposite parties
Complaint under Sections 12 & 14 of Consumer Protection Act,1986
BEFORE: SMT JYOTI SIWACH, MEMBER
SH.SURENDER SINGH BALYAN, MEMBER.
Present: Shri Pawan Kumar complainant in person
OP-1 exparte
OP-2 given up
ORDER JYOTI SIWACH, MEMBER.
The case of the complainant, in brief, is that he purchased Mobile HTC Desire 500 Dual G Blue IMEI No.357654052305014 from OP-1 for a sum of Rs.19,000/- vide Cash Memo No.AS-014 dated 02.04.2014 and the said mobile was insured by OP-2 vide Plan ID No.# RGS 800895 dated 02.04.2014. However, on 15.01.2015 the said phone started giving the following problems:
The screen break when using the phone
Ear speaker also damage
Charging disabled
The complainant contacted OP-2 on the advice of OP-1 and thereafter the representative of OP-2 Mr. Harjeet Singh came to the complainant on 21.01.2015 and received the defective mobile phone of the complainant against Receipt No.1771 dated 21.01.2015. Thereafter complainant contacted Mr. Harjeet Singh on 28.01.2015 but he gave false assurances till 05.02.2015 and thereafter stopped talking with the complainant. In the compelling circumstances he had to purchase another mobile phone worth Rs.17,600/-. The complainant also sent legal notice through his counsel but of no use. Thus, the opposite parties were deficient in providing services to the complainant. The complainant prayed that the opposite parties be directed to pay Rs. 19,000/- with interest @ 18 % p.a. and also to pay Rs.80,000/- for harassment and mental agony. The complaint is supported with an affidavit.
2 Notice of the complaint was given to the opposite parties. OP failed to turn up despite service and thus was proceeded exparte vide order dated 06.07.2015. However, OP-2 was given up by the complainant vide separate statement made on 07.09.2015 after issuance of the notice as the notice sent to the OP-2 received back with the report “Left Address”.
3 We have heard the complainant and have perused the record available on file.
4 Therefore, after going through the facts and circumstances of the case and the evidence placed on file it is evident that he purchased Mobile HTC Desire 500 Dual G Blue IMEI No.357654052305014 from OP-1 for a sum of Rs.19,000/- vide Cash Memo No.AS-014 dated 02.04.2014 and the said mobile was insured by OP-2 (Later on given up) vide Plan ID No. # RGS 800895 dated 02.04.2014. On 15.01.2015 the said mobile started giving the following problems:
The screen break when using the phone
Ear speaker also damage
Charging disabled
The complainant requested the opposite party to rectify the defect in the mobile phone but of no use. However, the said mobile phone was got insured with the opposite party No.2 by the opposite party No.1. The receipt dated 02.04.2014 (Ex.C-2) by which OP-1 has charged a sum of Rs.1900/- from the complainant bears the seal and stamp of the opposite party No.1. Thus, it is the opposite party no.1 who has issued the receipt on behalf of OP-2 (Given up) as it does not bear the seal and signature of the opposite party No.2. When the opposite party no.1 has received the premium of insurance amounting to Rs.1900/- then the opposite party no.1 is responsible for the damage in the mobile and thus, we hold opposite party no.1 responsible for the defect/damage in the mobile phone for receiving the insurance amount of Rs.1900/- from the complainant. The above said evidence goes unrebutted as the opposite party no.1 himself has failed to turn up to rebut the claim of the complainant. Thus, there is no reason to disbelieve the version of the complainant. We therefore, hold that the opposite party no.1 has adopted unfair trade practice and is also deficient in providing services to the complainant.
5 Therefore, we direct the opposite party no.1 to refund the price of the mobile phone in question Rs.19,000/- with interest @ 9 % p.a. to the complainant from the date of filing of the present complaint i.e. 07.04.2015 till realization. However, OP-1 is entitled to get refund from the insurer as OP-1 was acting on behalf of insurer Royal Green Services. The complainant is also entitled to compensation for harassment and mental agony as well as litigation expenses to the tune of Rs.3,000/-. OP-1 shall make the compliance of the order within 30 days from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. The parties be communicated of the order accordingly and the file be consigned to the records after due compliance.
(Surender Singh Balyan) (Jyoti Siwach)
Member Member
11.02.2016 11.02.2016
