BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES
REDRESSAL FORUM, JALANDHAR.
Complaint No.282 of 2018
Date of Instt. 03.07.2018
Date of Decision: 03.07.2019
Kulwinder Kumar aged about years son of Bakhshish Chand, resident of Village Rasulpur Brahmana, P. O. Rahimpur, Tehsil and District Jalandhar.
..........Complainant
Versus
1. M/s Lenovo India Pvt. Ltd., Vatika Business Park, 1st Floor, Badshahpur, Sector 49, Sohna Road, Gurugram-122001 through its Director/M. D./Authorized Signatory.
2. M/s Gopal Telecom-CSR, 1st Floor Nirmal Complex, Near Namdev, Jalandhar through its Manager/Incharge/authorized signatory.
3. M/s Mobile House, H. O. Chadha Mobile House Pvt. Ltd., Near Bhagat Singh Chowk Jalandhar through its Manager/Incharge/authorized person.
….….. Opposite Parties
Complaint Under the Consumer Protection Act.
Before: Sh. Karnail Singh (President)
Smt. Jyotsna (Member)
Present: Sh. G. S. Grover, Adv Counsel for the Complainant.
OPs exparte.
Order
Karnail Singh (President)
1. This complaint has been filed by the complainant, wherein alleged that the complainant had purchased Lenovo Mobile KB Note 4+64 GB (Model XT1902-3) from the OP No.3 on 26.01.2018, vide Invoice/Bill No.T-32617 for Rs.13,200/-, having IMEI No.8645100034266497. At the time of purchasing the said Lenovo mobile phone, the complainant was assured that there is one year warranty for the phone and if during that period, the said mobile is having any functioning problem, then the company will take care of that and the complainant would have to bear no expenses. From the very beginning, the mobile set started creating problems. The phone used to restart/reboots of its own, there was problem with its power and the phone was not responding. The complainant was very much surprised about its mis-functioning and the complainant visited OP No.3, who was asked the complainant to contact the OP No.2, who is authorized service center of OP No.1. The complainant visited OP No.2 and apprised the OP No.2 of the said defect and the engineers of the OP No.2 had checked the mobile phone thoroughly and had observed that there is power issue with said mobile phone and made comments and the complainant was told that motherboard of the said phone is having some problem and the same will be changed with a new one and the complainant was asked to visit the service centre on 23.02.2018, where the mobile phone was deposited and job card was issued by the OP to the complainant.
2. That after 3 days, the complainant again visited the OP No.2 and the complainant was surprised to know that the defect in said mobile phone has not been rectified and when the complainant enquired from the official concern of OP No.2, the complainant was told to made payment for the motherboard of said mobile phone. The complainant was surprised as the said mobile phone is within warranty period as evident from the bill and job card and requested the officials of OP No.2 to change the motherboard free of cost being the mobile phone is within warranty period, but the official of the OP No.2 refused. Thereafter, the complainant again visited the office of OP No.2 and make a request to change the motherboard, but OP No.2 refused to listen to the request of the complainant. The negligence in providing service properly to the complainant has caused lot of harassment to the complainant and even there is a deficiency in service on the part of the OPs and as such, necessity arose to file the present complaint with the prayer that the mobile phone having some inherent manufacturing defect, therefore the same may be replaced or in the alternative the refund of the value of the mobile i.e. Rs.13,200/- along with interest @ 18% per annum be disbursed to the complainant and further OPs be directed to pay compensation of Rs.50,000/- for causing mental tension, agony and harassment to the complainant and further OPs be directed to pay litigation expenses of Rs.11,000/-.
3. Notice of the complaint was given to the OPs, but despite service all the OPs did not come present and ultimately, they were proceeded against exparte.
4. In order to prove his exparte claim, the complainant himself tendered into evidence his duly sworn affidavit Ex.CA alongwith some documents Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-6 and closed the evidence.
5. We have heard the learned counsel for the complainant and also gone through the case file very minutely.
6. Precisely, the case set up by the complainant is only that he purchased a mobile phone make Lenovo Mobile KB Note 4+64 GB (Model XT1902-3) for a sum of Rs.13,200/-, vide Invoice Ex.C-1 dated 26.01.2018 and the warranty of the mobile has been given one year and during the warranty period, the mobile phone was having some major defect and accordingly, the same was deposited by the complainant with service centre i.e. OP No.2 for repairing the same, but the OP No.2 refused to repair the said mobile phone free of cost rather the OP No.2 claiming the price of the motherboard, which required to be replaced and despite numerous request on the part of the complainant, the OP did not agree and accordingly, the complainant alleged that there is ac deficiency in service on the part of the OP and filed the instant complaint.
7. We have sympathetically considered the submission of the complainant and find that the complainant has established on the file that he purchased a mobile phone, vide bill Ex.C-1 dated 28.01.2018 and the same was deposited with the service centre i.e OP No.2, but the defect in the mobile phone has yet not been rectified. The factum above noted are required to be falsified by the OP by appearing in the Forum, but for the best known reason, the OPs did not come present to meet the grievances of the complainant and accordingly, we find that the version of the complainant, which is un-rebutted and un-challenged is required to the accepted and accordingly, hold that the complainant is entitled for the relief claimed.
8. In the light of above detailed discussion, the complaint of the complainant is partly accepted and all the OPs are directed to refund the price value of the mobile phone i.e. Rs.13,200/- to the complainant with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of purchase i.e. 28.01.2018, till realization and further OPs are directed to pay compensation to the complainant for causing mental tension and harassment, to the tune of Rs.7000/- and litigation expenses of Rs.3000/. The entire compliance be made within one month 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.
9. 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 Jyotsna Karnail Singh
03.07.2019 Member President
