MR LAXMI NARAYAN PADHI, PRESIDENT…              The brief fact of case is that, the complainant being a college going student and also part time employee under a private shop had purchased a 2.0 USB HUB - i Ball UNIHUB 33 set bearing its No.0307AX66319 on dated 13.05.2016 from the OP.no.1 for Rs.400/- for the purpose to use his laptop and computer devises. That after purchase of just some days, the USB hub reported defect like its two points (out of 04) were not properly working and it does not display anything in his computer and laptop. As the product having one year warranty, the complainant approached the OP No.1 and requested to replace the product with a new one through OP.2 but in response to his request the OP.1 advised the complainant to approach the OP.2 through phone and assured that he will put forward the grievance to the OP.2. Finally finding no way as per advice of OP.1, the complainant approached the customer care of OP.2 through their help line number i.e. 912230815001 and placed his request to repair or replace the product with a new one, but the help line officials did nothing except evasive assurances. The complainant being a college student highly depends on his computer and laptop but he restrained from its use due to the nonstandard product and inaction of OP.s. Hence he inflicted mental agony, physical harassment and financial losses due to the arbitrary action of OP.s. So he prayed before the Forum to direct the OP.s to pay the price of alleged product and a sum of Rs.25,000/- as compensation and cost.

2.         The OP.2 through his A/A entered his appearance and filed counter in the case wherein he specified nothing except evasive denials and contended that the complainant has not made any correspondences to him prior filing the case. The OP.1 in spite of receiving notice neither appeared nor cared to file his counter in the case despite several chances given to him on dt.25.8.16,  7.9.16,  19.9.16,  24.9.16 &  29.9.16 since its admission. Hence the OP.1 set ex parte as per provisions of C.P.Act.1986. The complainant has filed cash invoice & the alleged product in question. The complainant has been minutely heard the case and perused the record.

3.         The consumer protection act is a socio economic beneficial law, intended for speedy delivery of justice to the aggrieved and needy consumers and every complaint is supposed to be disposed off within a timeframe in consonance with the objects of the benevolent legislature, but inordinate delay in procurement of evidences and counter by the parties have emerged for reaching delirium to achievement of such objects.

4.         From the above submissions, it reveals that the complainant has procured the USB Hub in question on dt.13.05.2016 from the OP.1 and the same became defect within a short period of two months. It is seen that, the product has one year warranty, hence the complainant time and again approached the OP.s for repair/replace or for price of the product, but the OP.s neither replaced the product nor pays the price to the complainant despite of several persuasions. Considering the evidences, submissions by the complainant, we are of the view that, the alleged product has manufacture defect and especially the OP.2 failed to pay any heed to the persuasions of complainant deliberately. Thus the complainant inflicted mental agony with the defective device, and also inflicted financial losses and valuable times due to the negligence and unfair practices of OP.s, hence he prayed for compensation.

5.         From the above transactions and perusing the submissions filed by the complainant, we have carefully verified the alleged product and found defect. It is further seen that the OP.2 in his counter contends that, the complainant dialed a wrong number to approach the OP.2, but it is seen from the wrapper cover of the product that the complainant dialed a proper number to approach the OP.2 and the complainant dialed them as per advice of OP.1. To confirm the help line number we also access internet and found proper, hence there is nothing to reject the contentions of complainant. Hence we feel that the action of OP.2 is illegal, highhanded, arbitrary and unfair which amounts to deficiency in service and hence he found guilty under the C.P.Act 1986, hence the complainant is lawfully entitled for compensatory relief. As thus the complaint is allowed against the OP.2 with cost.    

                                                    O  R  D  E  R

i.          The opposite party no.2 supra is hereby directed to pay the price of the USB Hub i.e. Rs.400/- (Four hundred) inter alia, to pay Rs.10,000/-(Ten thousand) as compensation and a sum of Rs.5000/-(Five thousand) towards the cost of litigation to the complainant.

ii.         All the above directions shall be complied with in 30 days of this order, failing which, the total sum will bear 12% interest per annum till its realization. Pronounced on this the 29th day of Sept' 2016.

                        Sd/-                                                                Sd/-

                  MEMBER                                              PRESIDENT, DCDRF,

                                                                                     NABARANGPUR.