BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM

VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

PRESENT

SRI. P. SUDHIR                                       :  PRESIDENT

SMT. R. SATHI                                         :  MEMBER

SMT. LIJU B. NAIR                                  : MEMBER

C.C. No. 355/2016 Filed on 22.07.2016

ORDER DATED: 01.12.2017

Complainant:

Jithin Noble, PNRA D 13, J.R.Mandiram, Sreekrishna Lane, Ambalamukku, Kowdiar P.O, Thiruvananthapuram-695 003.

                                   (Party in person)              

Opposite parties:

1. Manager, M/s Connexion, T.C 202442(9), 3^rd Floor, Menathottam Chambers, Pattom, Thiruvananthapuram-695 004.

2. Manager, Micromax Informatics Ltd., 90 A, Sector 18, Gurgaon, Haryana-122015.

(By Adv. K.S. Vijaya Kumar for 2^nd O.P)

This case having been heard on 12.10.2017, the Forum on 01.12.2017 delivered the following:

ORDER

SMT. LIJU B. NAIR: MEMBER

Case of the complainant is as follows:  Complainant purchased a mobile handset manufactured by the 2^nd opposite party on 19.02.2016 through online purchase.  There appeared several problems with the audio in outgoing while using the set and so it was given to the 1^st opposite party for repair on 11.03.2016.  It was returned on 31.03.2016 with the assurance that the damages were rectified.  But no change was there, and again it was sent to the head office of the 1^st opposite party for rectification.  Till now that handset was not returned and so he prays for refund of the purchase price along with compensation and cost.

Notice was accepted by opposite party and they even filed vakalath.  They came forward with the suggestion to refund the purchase price as a settlement, for which the complainant readily agreed.  But after that opposite party evaded from the scene even without filing version and so we proceeded in their absence.  

Issues:

1. Is there any deficiency in service on the part of opposite party?
2. Reliefs and costs if any?

Issues (i) & (ii):- Complainant filed affidavit along with 2 documents which were marked as Ext. P1 and P2.  Ext. P1 is the copy of purchase bill which shows the amount of purchase as Rs. 6,649/-.  Ext. P2 is the copy of job sheet given by 2^nd opposite party.  Nothing contradictory is there to the allegations raised by the complainant.  So we are allowing the complaint.  The purpose for which the mobile hand set was purchased was not served.  So he is eligible for compensation also which we fix as Rs. 2,500/-.   No order on cost.

In the result, complaint is allowed.  Opposite parties are jointly and severally ordered to pay the complainant Rs. 6,649/- (Rupees Six Thousand Six Hundred and Forty Nine only) along with Rs. 2,500/- (Rupees Two Thousand Five Hundred only) as compensation within two months of receipt of this order failing which the entire amount i.e; Rs. 9,149/- (Rs. 6,649/- + Rs. 2,500/-) will carry interest at the rate of 9% from the date of default till the date of realization.  No order on cost.

A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties free of charge and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room. 

          Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Forum, this the 1^st day of December 2017.

Sd/-

LIJU B. NAIR                        : MEMBER

 Sd/-

P. SUDHIR                            : PRESIDENT

Sd/-

                        R. SATHI                               : MEMBER

jb

C.C. No. 355/2016

APPENDIX

  I      COMPLAINANT’S WITNESS:

                             NIL

II       COMPLAINANT’S DOCUMENTS:

P1     - Copy of invoice dated 19.02.2016

P2     - Copy of job sheet dated 11.03.2016

III      OPPOSITE PARTY’S WITNESS:

                             NIL

 IV     OPPOSITE PARTY’S DOCUMENTS:

                             NIL

                                                                                                      Sd/-

PRESIDENT

jb