Delhi

North East

CC/146/2017

Shri Asif Ali - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/S Motorola Authorised Service Centre and Others - Opp.Party(s)

06 Jan 2023

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION: NORTH-EAST

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

D.C. OFFICE COMPLEX, BUNKAR VIHAR, NAND NAGRI, DELHI-93

 

Complaint Case No. 146/17

 

In the matter of:

 

	Shri Asif Ali S/o Shri Khalil Ahmed C-47, Street No.11/3, Matke Wali, Chauhan Banger, Near Bilal Masjid, Delhi-110053	Complainant
	Versus
1.         2.         3.           4.	Motorola Authorised Service Center, Strength Services (P) Ltd, WA-88, 1st Floor, Above ICICI Bank, Shakarpur, Delhi-110092   Motorola Mobility India Pvt. Ltd.(Head office) 12th Floor, Tower D, DLF Cyber Green, DLF Phase-III, U-6 Road Cyber City, Sec, Gurugram,122002   WS Retail Services Private Ltd. Ozone Manay Tech Park, No.56/18, ‘B’ Block, 9th Floor, Garvebhavipalya, Hosur Road, Banglore-560068, Karnataka, India.   Flipkart Internet Pvt. Ltd. Vaishnavi Summit, Ground Floor, 7th Main 80 Feet Road, 3rd Block, Kormangala Industrial Layout, Bengaluru-560034, India.	Opposite Parties

 

DATE OF INSTITUTION:       JUDGMENT RESERVED ON:                           DATE OF ORDER:

27.04.17 07.10.22 06.01.23

 

CORAM:

Surinder Kumar Sharma, President

Anil Kumar Bamba, Member

ORDER

      Anil Kumar Bamba, Member

The Complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer protection Act, 1986.

Case of the Complainant

1. The case of the Complainant as revealed from the record is that the Complainant purchased one Moto G ( 2^nd Generation) (White,16 GB) from Opposite Party No.3 vide order ID 0D506633090484244000 and Order date 26.07.16 for a sum of Rs. 8,252/- having IMEI No. 353325065291563. At the time of purchasing, the Opposite Party No.3 has given refund/Return policy for ten days to Complainant for any defect along with a warranty of one year to the Opposite Party No.2 of said mobile in India only. The Complainant stated that he found some deficiencies after 8 months of purchasing of the said mobile then he visited Opposite Party No.1 on 22.03.17. The officials of Opposite Party No.1 check the details of mobile though its IMEI no. and found that the mobile is out of warranty and is out of India i.e. Hong kong. Then the Complainant approached managing director (Dhiraj Thakur) of Opposite Party No.1 and informed the Complainant that the said mobile cannot be repaired there as it does not belong to India. The managing director of Opposite Party No.1 suggested him that the said matter was concerned with Opposite Party No.3. On 22.03.17, the Complainant called the customer care of Opposite Party No.3 and they were unable to make out the problems and transferred the call to their seniors and team of Opposite Party No.3 suggested him to wait for 48 hours to resolve the problem. The Complainant submitted that he received a call from Opposite Party No.3 after 72 hours and they suggested him to contact Opposite Party No.2 and also to send an e-mail with purchase bill. The Complainant contacted Opposite Party No.2 and they advised him to visit Opposite Party No.1 and got them contacted with managing director of Opposite Party No.1 and also said that if the said mobile was not repaired by  Opposite Party No.1 then Opposite Party No.1 would have been terminated and ceased by Opposite Party No.2. Then the Complainant visited Opposite Party No.1 on the advise of Opposite Party No.2 and Opposite Party No.2 got back to its promise to talk to the managing director of Opposite Party No.1 and Opposite Party No.2 itself said that the said mobile cannot be amended in India. It is submitted by the Complainant that Opposite Party No.3 sold the mobile to the Complainant which belongs to the Hong kong country and the Complainant is not capable of having service in India. Hence, this shows deficiency on the part of Opposite Parties. Complainant has prayed to direct the Opposite Party No.3 to pay Rs. 8,252/- i.e. the cost of mobile phone in question with interest and Rs. 88,000/- for mental harassment. He has also prayed for Rs. 22,000/- on account of litigation charges.
2.  None has appeared on behalf of Opposite Party No.1 & 2 to contest the case despite service of notice on 13.05.17 and 15.05.17 respectively. Therefore, Opposite Party No.1 & 2 were proceeded against Ex Parte vide order dated 06.07.2017.
3.  None on behalf of Opposite Party No.3 & 4 was appeared for three consecutively dates i.e. 23.08.17, 03.11.17 & 14.11.17. Therefore, Opposite Party No. 3 & 4  were proceeded against Ex-Parte vide order dated 14.11.2017

Evidence of the Complainant

4. The Complainant in support of his complaint filed his affidavit wherein he has supported the averments made in the complaint

Arguments & Conclusion

5. We have heard the Complainant. We have also perused the file and the written arguments filed by the Complainant. The case of the Complainant is that he has purchased one mobile from Opposite Party on 29.07.16 for a sum of Rs. 8,252/- having IMEI No. 353325065291563. At the time of purchasing the Opposite Party No.3 has given refund/return policy for 10 days to Complainant for any defect along with warranty of one year in India of the said mobile phone. The Complainant stated that he found some deficiency after 8 months of purchasing of said mobile then he visited Opposite Party No.1 on 22.03.17. The official of Opposite Party No.1 checks the detail of mobile through its IMEI no. and found that mobile is out of warranty and is out of India.
6. Complainant has produce only one invoice by which he purchase the said mobile phone. He did not submitted any document of warranty of the said mobile phone or any material of his visit to Opposite Parties regarding complaint of non-functioning of the said mobile phone. There is no document found along with complaint or with evidence with regard to non-functioning of phone or warranty of the phone does not pertain to India and said mobile is made for sale in Hong kong and not in India.
7. In view of the above discussion, complaint is not allowed. Therefore, the complaint is dismissed accordingly. 
8. Order announced on 06.01.23

Copy of this order be given to the parties free of cost.

File be consigned to Record Room.

 

 

(Anil Kumar Bamba)           Member

(Surinder Kumar Sharma) President