DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM: NORTH-WEST
GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI
CSC-BLOCK-C, POCKET-C, SHALIMAR BAGH, DELHI-110088.
CC No: 328/2016
D.No._______________ Dated:________________
IN THE MATTER OF:
MANOJ KUMAR MANOJAS/o SH. TRILOKI NATH,
R/o 108-D, LIG DDA FLATS,
GULABI BAGH, NEW DELHI-110007. … COMPLAINANT
Versus
1. M/s AVJ COMMUNICATIONS,
SHOP No. 20, 1st FLOOR, HUDSON LANE,
KINGSWAY CAMP, NEAR G.T.B. METRO STATION,
GATE-4, DELHI-1100009.
2. CLOUDTAIL INDIA PVT. LTD.,
UNIT No. I, KHEWAT/KHATA No.373/400,
MUSTATIL No.31, VILLAGE TAORU, TEHSIL TAORU,
DISTRICT MEWAT, ON BILASPUR-TAORU ROAD,
MEWAT-122105, HARYANA.
3. M/s YU TELEVENTURE PVT. LTD.,
PLOT No. 21/14, BLOCK-A, PHASE-II,
NARAINA INDL. AREA, NEW DELHI-110028. … OPPOSITE PARTY(IES)
CORAM:SH. M.K. GUPTA, PRESIDENT
SH. BARIQ AHMED, MEMBER
MS. USHA KHANNA, MEMBER
Date of Institution: 11.03.2016
Date of decision: 04.02.2019
MS. USHA KHANNA, MEMBER
ORDER
1. The complainant has filed the present complaint against the OPs underthe Consumer Protection Act, 1986 thereby alleging that the complainant bought a Mobile handset YU Yureka (Moondust Grey)
CC No. 328/2016 Page 1 of 5
BOOWU2MQOY IMEI No. 911401507066882 through internet (online) from OP-2 on 08.05.2015for a sum of Rs.8,999/-. The complainant further alleged that the mobile handset of the complainant was damaged by water and the complainant contacted OP-1 and the complainant was told to pay Rs.4,500/- for the replacement of the mobile handset and the complainant paid Rs.4,500/- for the replacement and the complainant was told to collect the mobile handset after one week. Thereafter, the complainant made several visits to the office of OP-1 but every time the complainant was told to come after few days and OP-1 is indulging in unfair trade practice as despite making the payment of Rs.4,500/-, OP-1 is on one pretext or other has not replaced/repaired the mobile handset.
2. On these allegations the complainant has filed the complaint praying for direction to OPs to replace the mobile handset of the complainant as well as compensation of Rs.25,000/- for causing mental agony and harassment and has also sought litigation cost.
3. None for OP-1& OP-2 has appeared despite service of notice and has been proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 11.07.2016. OP-3 has been contesting the complaint and has filed written statement. In the written statement OP-3 submitted that the case of the complainant is not maintainable and thus liable to be dismissed. OP-3 further submitted that OP-3 never denied to provide its after
CC No. 328/2016 Page 2 of 5
sale services to the complainant as assured under the terms of warrantee and still ready to provide the same subject to the terms of the warrantee and the complainant also not disclosed the specific defect in the handset and also the cause of defect, whether the defect in the handset is due to liquid/physical damaged. OP-3 further submitted that there was no major defect in the mobile handset and as such the complaint is liable to be dismissed. OP-3 further submitted that the complainant purchased mobile handset on 08.05.2015 and approached the authorized service center on 20.01.2016 and after inspecting the handset the authorized service center accepted the mobile handset out of warrantee and an estimate of Rs.4,500/- was given to the complainant for the repair and the complainant refused to pay the repair charges and insisted the authorized service center to repair under warrantee and the authorized service center refused to repair the same under warrantee as the mobile handset having physically damaged and the complainant filed the present false, frivolous & baseless complaint just to get undue advantage from the OPs.
4. The complainant filed rejoinder and denied the version of OP-3.
5. In order to prove hiscase the complainant filed his affidavit in evidence and also filed written arguments. Thecomplainant also placed on record copy of retail invoice dated 08.05.2015 issued by OP-2 and copy of job sheet dated 20.01.2016 issued by OP-2 and
CC No. 328/2016 Page 3 of 5
copy of communication dated 11.02.2016 sent by the complainant to OP-3 and reply dated 12.02.2016 sent by OP-3 to the complainant through e-mail wherein OP-3 admitted the complaint and stated that “to wait for some time and you will get your replacement as soon as possible”.
6. On the other hand, OP-3failed to file affidavit of any of the witness, however, OP-3 filed written arguments.
7. This forum has considered the case of the complainant as well as OP-3 in the light of evidence and documents placed on record. It is revealed that the complainant purchased the mobile handset for Rs.8,999/-. The complainant has setup the case to the effect that he handed over the mobile handset to the authorized service center for repair vide job sheet dated 20.01.2016 and also paid Rs.4,500/-. But OP has neither repair the mobile handset nor replaced the mobile handset and despite following up and several personal visits and e-mail communication OP-3 has failed to returned/replaced the mobile handset and this action amounts to deficiency in service on the part of OP-3.
8. In these circumstances, this forum is of opinion that OP-3 is guilty of unfair trade practice and deficiency in service.
9. Thus, holding guilty for the same, we direct OP-3 to
i) To refund to the complainant the depreciated cost of the mobile handset i.e. Rs.6,000/- (rupees Six thousand only)
CC No. 328/2016 Page 4 of 5
on return of the original invoice, job sheet and accessories.
ii) To pay to the complainant Rs.4,500/- which have been received by the authorized service center for repair.
iii) To pay to the complainant an amount of Rs.3,000/- as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment and includes cost of litigation.
10. The above amount shall be paid by OP-3 to the complainant within 30 days from the date of receiving copy of this order failing which OP-3 shall be liable to pay interest on the entire awarded amount @ 10% per annum from the date of receiving copy of this order till the date of payment. If OP-3 fails to comply with the order within 30 days from the date of receiving copy of this order, the complainant may approach this Forum u/s 25 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
11. Let a copy of this order be sent to each party free of cost as per regulation 21 of the Consumer Protection Regulations, 2005. Thereafter file be consigned to record room.
Announced on this 4thday of February, 2019.
BARIQ AHMED USHA KHANNA M.K. GUPTA
(MEMBER) (MEMBER) (PRESIDENT)
CC No. 328/2016 Page 5 of 5
