BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES
REDRESSAL COMMISSION, JALANDHAR.
Complaint No.411 of 2021
Date of Instt. 13.12.2021
Date of Decision: 08.12.2022
Mr. Rupansh Gupta, r/o 60, Lajpat Nagar, Jalandhar, Punjab-144001.
..........Complainant
Versus
M/s Apple India Private Limited, 19th Floor, Concorde Tower C, UB City, No.24, Vittal Mallya Road, Bangalore-560001
….….. Opposite Party
Complaint Under the Consumer Protection Act.
Before: Dr. Harveen Bhardwaj (President)
Smt. Jyotsna (Member) Sh. Jaswant Singh Dhillon (Member)
Present: Complainant in Person.
Sh. Bharat Mahajan, Adv. Counsel for OP.
Order
Dr. Harveen Bhardwaj (President)
1. The instant complaint has been filed by the complainant, wherein it is alleged that trusting the brand name “Apple”, the complainant purchased iPhone 7 256 GB, bearing Model No.MN992HN/A on 9th January 2018, vide Invoice No.T-2529 and paid Rs.51,800/- for it. Since the beginning, the mobile was troubling the complainant as it kept on restarting automatically, the lock screen froze very often and it did not connect to internet (Wi-Fi or mobile) for some time even though the Wi-Fi was working properly on other devices, which caused severe mental agony to the complainant. Two days after the purchase, the complainant complained to the opposite party about the issue in the phone. On the telephonic conversation, the opposite party requested the complainant to send the data of the phone to the opposite party, which was subsequently done by him, yet the problem could not be resolved which caused severe mental stress and agony to him. The complainant complained about the issue via emails also yet no satisfactory solution was provided by the opposite party for the same which is totally wrong and unjust and has caused severe mental trauma to the complainant. Subsequently the complainant visited the authorized Service Center, who refused to replace the phone even though it was clearly defective from the beginning. Further, the opposite party's representatives instructed the complainant to do a factory reset of the phone after which all the data in the phone was lost, yet this could not resolve the issue faced by the complainant. The opposite party informed the complainant that the problem the complainant was facing was in the software and this will be resolved in the next update. So the complainant patiently waited for the new software update and even after various updates in the software, the issue still remained which further aggravated the mental agony of the complainant. Recently, when the complainant updated the phone to iOS 15, the complainant was shocked and surprised to notice that the phone stopped working. The screen went blank and only the apple logo was displayed on it. Immediately, the complainant contacted the opposite party and complained about the issue and informed about the history of issues which he faced after the purchase of the phone. After a while, the opposite party informed the complainant that there is some problem in hardware and the phone was not getting connected to their computer. The opposite party's representatives connected the complainant to a senior, who, asked the complainant to provide the IMEI number of the phone. She then confirmed that she has found the case ID which the complainant raised in 2018. Further, she told the complainant that she has to do some investigation after which she will revert, which momentarily satisfied the complainant. What the complainant patiently waited for the resolution, but received no resolution, which is totally unprofessional and unethical and because of the opposite party's carelessness and negligence the complainant is made to suffer for no fault of his own. The complainant has contacted the opposite party numerous times and requested to resolve the issue he is facing yet the opposite party's representatives have made no effort in assisting him which clearly shows the opposite party's pathetic services and its fraudulent intention to cheat my innocent client. The complainant invested a huge amount of money in purchasing the mobile, but it seems that all his hard-earned money has gone to waste as the opposite party has defrauded the complainant by failing to replace the defective mobile or repairing it. Since then the complainant has been regularly contacting the opposite party via emails, messages & phone calls, but the opposite party has failed to provide any resolution and made no efforts to rectify the deficiency in promised services which is indeed regrettable and highly unprofessional and has caused losses/expenses and severe mental agony to the complainant. The complainant has suffered financial loss and severe mental stress, chasing the opposite party to replace or repair the defective product but got no resolution. This is totally wrong and unjust action on its part and amounts to cheating, fraud as well as negligence and gross deficiency in promised service. Refusing to replace or repair the product and not providing a proper solution for the concern, amounts to cheating, fraud and gross deficiency of service and the customer has all the right and entitlement to get the refund and further to get compensation for the mental agony and financial loss suffered by him. The complainant has already sent a legal notice to the opposite party but all in vain and as such, necessity arose to file the present complaint with the prayer that the complaint of the complainant may be accepted and OP be directed to refund the amount of purchase alongwith interest @ 18% per annum or replace the mobile with a brand new mobile immediately. Further OP be directed to pay the cost of litigation to the tune of Rs.25,000/- and Rs.5,00,000/- as a compensation for causing mental tension and harassment to the complainant.
2. Notice of the complaint was given to the OP, who filed reply and contested the complaint by taking preliminary objections that the at the very outset, it is stated that the contentions and averments made by the Complainant in the instant complaint are blatantly false, vexatious, devoid of any merits and made with the malafide intention of harassing the answering Opposite Party. The Complainant with dishonest intention seeks undue benefits and unjust enrichment by making blatantly false and unsubstantiated claims against the OP. It is submitted that the Complainant is guilty of materially concealing and suppressing material facts and has approached this Commission with unclean hands with the sole intention of deceiving this Commission. The instant Complaint is nothing but an absolute abuse of the due process of law. Thus, rendering the complaint, liable to be dismissed, in limine, for not having merits. The contentions, submissions and allegations in the complaint are incorrect, vexatious, misleading and denied except which specifically admitted hereinafter. The present complaint is a malafide one, devoid of merit and contradictory to the established principles of law. The instant complaint has been devised to mislead this Commission. The brief facts if that the Complainant had purchased an iPhone 7 256 GB bearing IMEI No. 353778084930886 on 06-01-2018. The one year warranty issued on the said device by the OP expired on 05-01-2019. During the warranty period there were no issues reported by the Complainant and he has been satisfactorily been using this iPhone till date. The complainant alleged in this complaint that he had some issues on device from the beginning. He has not approached any Apple Authorized Service Provider (AASP) till date to get his device physically checked, as per the warranty terms and conditions. There have been no other issues detected on the said device by any AASP on the said device. The Complainant is aware that as per the terms and conditions of the Warranty, the device will be serviced/ repaired or replaced, depending on the condition of the device. There is no evidence produced by the Complainant regarding any issue on his device as it has not been physically inspected and advised by any AASP till date. It is also pertinent to mention that the said device is out of warranty and is not qualified to receive free service/replacement and will receive the same depending on the diagnosis of an AASP (he will have to pay for the same). Despite being aware of the same, the Complainant filed this complaint. On merits, the factum with regard to purchasing iPhone by the complainant from the OP is admitted and it is also admitted that the iPhone is having one year warranty, but the other allegations as made in the complaint are categorically denied and lastly submitted that the complaint of the complainant is without merits, the same may be dismissed.
3. Rejoinder not filed by the complainant.
4. In order to prove their respective versions, both the parties have produced on the file their respective evidence.
5. We have heard the complainant and learned counsel for the OP and have also gone through the case file as well as written arguments submitted by the complainant very minutely.
6. The complainant has purchased the Apple iPhone for Rs.51,800/-, vide Ex.C-1. As per the contention of the complainant, the mobile started giving trouble from the very beginning as it kept on restarting automatically, the lock screen froze very often and it did not connect to internet even the calculator application was also not working properly. He has proved on record the emails sent to OP intimating about the problems in the mobile suffered by him. He has proved on record the number of emails and reply to the emails given by the OPs from Ex.C-2 to Ex.C-30, which show that he contacted the OPs after about seven days after the purchase of the mobile. In all the emails, he has expressed his non-satisfaction as the employees of the OPs did not respond to his phone and emails. He has proved the instances vide letter Ex.C-11 and he has also written a letter explaining that every time a new executive is being allotted to the complainant and he had to explain the problems time and again to the new executive and this is wastage of time. He has mentioned all the facts in email Ex.C-30. Vide Ex.C-25, he was asked to watch the mobile the whole day and to follow the steps of the company to check the problem. He was even asked to install the new software as advised by the service centre of the OP, but despite contacting the OP’s service centre and writing emails to the OP and even getting the reply from the OP, his grievance was never resolved. He has also produced on record reply to the emails, which could not be accessed earlier, but later on the complainant has proved on record all the messages to support and prove his conversation.
7. The contention of the OP is that the complainant has not come to the Commission with clean hands as during the warranty period, there was no issue reported by the complainant and till date he has been using the mobile phone. It has been argued by the OPs that the complainant has never got inspected his mobile and device physically, therefore it cannot be said that his mobile or device suffered any problem or was having any defect as alleged by the complainant, but this contention is not tenable as the complainant has proved on record all the emails and reply to the emails showing that there occurred the problem and which was being tried to be solved online and ultimately, the problem and grievance of the complainant was never redressed. The OPs never asked him to get the device inspected personally and physically. The complainant has relied upon the case of “Harsh Pathak Vs. Ambika Enterprises”, wherein his Lordship held as under:-
“Non-repairing of mobile in question despite repeated requests proves deficiency in service on the part of OPs. Evidently the complainant had spent the money for the purchase of brand new mobile handset to facilitate himself but not for moving the service center and then this Forum for justice in the absence of proper service provided by the OPs . Even the defects in the mobile phone from the very first day of its purchase; makes pointer towards the poor quality of the product. The complainant has been deprived of possession of the mobile handset. Thus, there is deficiency in service on the part of the OPs. Resultantly, we find merit in the complaint, therefore, the same is allowed”.
Further, the complainant has relied upon a case, titled as “Indochem Electroni & Anr. Vs. Addl. Collector of Customs, A. P.”, wherein his Lordship held as under:-
“A telephone system was sold by the appellants to the respondent which stopped working properly within a month of its installation. The respondents or buyer demanded for the repair of the system but its poor performance continued even after some requests of repair were attended by the appellants. The State Commission ordered to refund a sum of Rs.1,87,559/- with interest @ 12% to the respondents.”
8. From the emails, reply to the emails and conversation between the OP and the complainant from January, 2019 till April, 2021, it is proved that the iPhone purchased by the complainant started giving trouble after few days of its purchase. The same was in warranty period and his grievance was never redressed. It has been proved that the complainant has suffered mental agony and harassment due to the unfair trade practice of the OP and thus, the complainant is entitled for the relief as claimed.
9. In view of the above detailed discussion, the complaint of the complainant is partly allowed and OP is directed to refund the amount of the iPhone i.e. Rs.51,800/- with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing the complaint till its realization. Further, OP is directed to pay Rs.10,000/- as compensation for causing mental tension and harassment to the complainant and Rs.5000/- as litigation expenses. The complainant is directed to return the defected iPhone to the OP at the time of receiving the award amount. The entire compliance be made within 45 days from the date of receipt of the copy of order. This complaint could not be decided within stipulated time frame due to rush of work.
10. Copies of the order be supplied to the parties free of cost, as per Rules. File be indexed and consigned to the record room.
Dated Jaswant Singh Dhillon Jyotsna Dr. Harveen Bhardwaj
08.12.2022 Member Member President
