Consumer Complaint No. 214 of 2016
Date of filing: 15.12.2016 Date of disposal: 21.4.2017
Complainant: Tamal Malik, S/o. Sukumar Malik, resident of Village: Dighara, Post Office: Balidewanganj, Police Station: Goghat, District: Hooghly, PIN – 712 616.
-V E R S U S-
Opposite Party: 1. M/s. Nexgen Service, represented through its Proprietor, having its office at 1st Floor, Shibram Super Market, B. C. Road, Kalitala, PO., PS. & District: Burdwan, PIN – 713 101.
2. The Director, Micromax Informatics Ltd., having its office at 21/14A, Phase – II, Naraina Industrial Area, Delhi, PIN – 110 028.
Present: Hon’ble President: Sri Asoke Kumar Mandal.
Hon’ble Member: Smt. Silpi Majumder.
Appeared for the Complainant: Ld. Advocate, Suvro Chakraborty.
Appeared for the Opposite Party Nos. 1&2: None.
J U D G E M E N T
This complaint is filed by the Complainant u/S. 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 alleging deficiency in service, as well as, unfair trade practice against the OPs as the OPs did not return the mobile to him after its necessary repairing.
The brief fact of the case of the Complainant is that he purchased a YU Yuphoria mobile set bearing IMEI no-911436256640438 through online shopping from Amazon on 30.07.2015. The total price of the mobile was for Rs.6, 999=00 and the Complainant had to pay a sum of Rs.7, 999=00 including all charges. After taking delivery of the mobile the Complainant paid the said amount to the delivery person. It is important to mention that there was one year warranty coverage of that mobile phone. On 29.07.2016 the mobile of the Complainant begun to create several problems relating to loud speaker, screen etc. As such he contacted with the OP-1 on 30.07.2016 and submitted the phone before them on the same day. After receiving of the phone the OP-1 issued one receipt in favour of the Complainant and told him to come for getting return of the mobile after 15 days. As such the Complainant after 15 days made contact with the OP-1 to get return of the same. On 20.08.2016 the OP-1 returned the mobile to the Complainant along with one job sheet bearing no-2121960-0716-24675860. Upon receipt of the job sheet the Complainant perused the same and came to learn that the OP-1 endorsed in the job sheet that there was problem of housing as it is broken but at the time of receiving the phone the housing was in good condition. Moreover the Complainant observed that the problems for which he submitted his phone before the OP-1, has not been solved. As such the Complainant again on the same day submitted his phone before the OP-1 and the OP-1 also received the same in its custody. In this time the OP-1 issued another job sheet bearing no-2121960-0816-25018978 in favour of the Complainant. At the time of receiving the phone from the Complainant the OP-1 assured him that they will either return the mobile to him after full repairing or will replaced the same with a new one within 15 days. On 25.08.2016 when the Complainant visited the OP-1 for receiving his mobile then the OP-1 told that few days more will be required. As such the Complainant again on 29.08.2016 went to the office of the OP-1 and on that date also further time has been prayed for, but no firm date was given. Since then the OP-1 has kept the said mobile under its custody and inspite of his several visits it had failed to give any satisfactory reply to him. Thereafter the Complainant approached before the CA & FBP, Burdwan, but the OPs did not turn up there. Finding no other alternative the Complainant has approached before this Ld. Forum by filing this complaint praying for direction upon the OPs either to replace the mobile phone with a new one or to pay a sum of Rs.7, 999=00 to him towards the cost of the mobile as paid by him during its purchase, to issue fresh warranty, to pay a sum of Rs.20, 000=00 as compensation due to mental pain, agony and harassment and litigation cost of Rs.10,000=00 to him.
After admission of the complaint notices were issued upon the OPs. Inspite of receipt of the notices both the OPs did not turn up before this Ld. Forum to contest the complaint either by filing written version or orally. Hence the Ld. Forum was pleased to fix the complaint for hearing ex parte against the OPs.
The Complainant has adduced evidence on affidavit along with some papers and documents in support of his contention.
We have carefully perused the petition of complaint; documents as available in the record and heard argument at length advanced by the Ld. Counsel for the Complainant. During final argument none was present on behalf of the OPs. After considering the papers and documents it is seen by us that admittedly the mobile purchased by the Complainant on 30.07.2015 by making payment of Rs.7,999=00towards the cost of the mobile and other charges became defective after using the same for about one year. The said mobile was under the warranty for one year. The Complainant purchased the said mobile through online shopping from Amazon and payment was made to the delivery person. As several problems cropped up in the said mobile on 29.07.2016 relating to loud speaker, screen etc. he submitted the same with the OP-1 being the authorized service centre for its necessary repairing. After 15 days the Complainant received the mobile from the OP-1 and during that time he was handed over one job sheet from where he came to know that there was housing problem. Moreover it was noticed by him that for which the mobile was submitted to the Op-1, the said problems had not been repaired/removed by the OP-1, rather the same was persisted. For this reason the Complainant submitted the said mobile again to the OP-1 for its necessary repairing. But since then the said mobile had not been returned to the Complainant either in repaired condition or in earlier condition consisting defects. The Complainant visited the OP-1 on several occasions, but to no effect, though verbal assurance was given by the OP-1 to him. Being harassed and dissatisfied with such action of the OP-1, the Complainant has preferred this complaint alleging deficient service of the OPs and claimed some reliefs. There is no document in the record from where we can draw the conclusion that the OP-1 had returned the mobile to the Complainant or stated that the defects cannot be removed or repaired. The OP-1 has kept silent over this matter. Such action in our opinion is an example of deficiency in service on the part of the OP-1, for which the OP-1 is liable to pay compensation to the Complainant. Be it mentioned that the Complainant is also entitled to get his mobile from the OP-1 after necessary repairing. The Complainant has prayed for fresh warranty, but in our view the Complainant is not entitled to get the same as the mobile became defective on the verge of expiry of its warranty. As the grievance had not been redressed by the OP-1 before approaching to the Court of Law and by filing this complaint the Complainant had to incur some expenses, hence in our considered view the Complainant is also entitled to get some amount towards litigation cost.
Going by the foregoing discussion, hence it is
O r d e r e d
that the complaint is allowed ex parte against the OPs with cost. The OP-1 shall return the questioned mobile to the Complainant within 30 days after its necessary repairing and removing all the defects, failing which, the OPs are directed either jointly or severally to replace the defective mobile with a new and similar description one to the Complainant within a period of 60 days from the date of passing of this judgment. The OPs shall pay either jointly or severally compensation to the tune of Rs.1, 000=00 due to unnecessary harassment, mental agony and pain and litigation cost of Rs.500=00 to the Complainant within 45 days from the date of passing of this judgment, in default the Complainant will be at liberty to put the entire order in execution as per provision of law.
Let plain copies of this order be supplied to the parties free of cost as per provisions of Consumer Protection Regulations, 2005.
(Asoke Kumar Mandal)
Dictated and corrected by me. President
DCDRF, Burdwan
(Silpi Majumder)
Member
DCDRF, Burdwan
(Silpi Majumder)
Member
DCDRF, Burdwan
