IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ALAPPUZHA
Monday the 31st day of August, 2015
Filed on 09.03.2015
Present
1. Smt. Elizabeth George (President)
2. Sri. Antony Xavier (Member)
3. Smt. Jasmine D (Member)
in
CC/No.73/2015
Between
Complainant:- Opposite parties:-
Sri. Sheraff K.S. 1. M/s. Lava International Ltd.
Al Sabah A-56, sector 64, Noida – 201 301
North of Muslim G.L.P.S. U.P., India
Punnapra P.O.
Alappuzha 2. The Manager, Tokyo Shop
Penta Menaka Shopping Complex
Shanmughan Road, Marine Drive
Ernakulam, Cochin – 682 031
3. M/s. Sonic System, Pulimoottil
Trade Centre, Mullackal, Alappuzha
O R D E R
SMT. JASMINE D. (MEMBER)
The facts of the complaint in short are as follows:-
The complainant purchased a mobile phone from the second opposite party manufactured by the first opposite party for an amount of Rs.10,900/-. On a rainy day while the complainant was travelling in a motor cycle, the phone became accidently wet and when the complainant tried to remove the battery, he came to know that the battery was not removable and it was an inbuilt battery and thereafter the phone was not working. When he approached the service centre to repair the same, the opposite party demanded an amount of Rs.6,500/- from the complainant stating water logging does not cover under warranty. The complainant further alleged that he has no knowledge that the battery was inbuilt at the time of purchase. The dealer does not convey the same to the complainant at the time of purchase. The complainant filed this complaint alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite parties.
2. Notices were served to the opposite parties and they did not appear before the Forum, hence set exparte.
3. Complainant filed proof affidavit and one document produced marked as Ext.A1. Ext.A1 is the copy of invoice dated 29.8.2014.
4. Considering the allegations of the complainant, the Forum has raised the following issues:-
1) Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties?
2) Whether the complainant is entitled to get any reliefs?
5. Points 1 and 2:- The points 1 and 2 can be considered together. The case of the complainant is that he had purchased a mobile phone from the second opposite party manufactured by the first opposite party. The said phone became defective, when the warranty was in existence and he approached the third opposite party for getting it repaired, they demanded an amount of Rs.6,500/- from the complainant stating water logging does not cover under warranty. Hence filed this complaint alleging deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. Ext.A1 marked. Ext.A1 is the copy of invoice dated 29.8.2014. From the document, it can be seen that the complainant purchased a mobile phone manufactured by the first opposite party from the second opposite party for an amount of Rs.10,900/- on 29.8.2014. According to the complainant, the said phone became defective and he could not use the phone when he approached the third opposite party the authorized service centre for repairing it they demanded Rs.6,500/- towards repairing charges. According to the complainant, the defect occurred when the warranty was in existence. The opposite parties were given sufficient opportunity to contest the case but they did not turn up nor produced any document to show that water logging does not cover under warranty. The defect occurred to the phone after 4 months from the date of purchase. So definitely the product is under warranty and the complainant is entitled to get it repaired free of cost. Since the defect has not been rectified, the opposite parties have committed deficiency in service and the complaint is allowed accordingly.
In the result, the opposite parties are directed to repair the mobile phone free of cost to the satisfaction of the complainant. Since the primary grievance of the complainant having been met adequately, we refrain from awarding compensation and cost. The order shall be complied within one month from the date of receipt of this order.
Pronounced in open Forum on this the 31st day of August, 2015.
Sd/- Smt. Jasmine.D. (Member)
Sd/- Smt. Elizabeth George (President)
Sd/- Sri. Antony Xavier (Member)
Appendix:-
Evidence of the complainant:-
Ext.A1 - Copy of invoice dated 29.8.2014
Evidence of the opposite parties:- Nil
// True Copy //
By Order
Senior Superintendent
To
Complainant/Opposite party/S.F.
Typed by:- pr/-
Compared by:-
