1.                     The brief history of the case of the complainant is that he purchased one Spice mobile handset Model No.FLO-6111 STAR having IMIE No.911164151495260 from OP.1 vide Order No.977531891 dt.24.9.15 and the consideration amount of Rs.1999/- was paid on delivery of the product through First Flight Courier. It is submitted that soon after the handset was put into service, the complainant noticed that the battery of the handset is not giving proper backup and after one month it was also found that the key pad is not working and set hanging.  On approach to ASC (OP.2) during first week of November, it repaired the set but did not issue job sheet.  During last week of November, the set did not function properly as low battery backup was continuing and on approach, the OP.2 issued job sheet No.1439 dt.30.11.2015 showing defect as “T/P not working – receiver”.  The complainant received back the set from OP.2 after 15 days but again found that the MIC was not functioning properly and the set is sometimes becoming dead.  The complainant handed over the set to OP.2 on 29.4.2016 and after issuing job sheet, the OP.2 stated that the set is be sent to higher centre for repair as the defect is of higher magnitude and also advised the complainant to come after 20 days.  After 20 days the OP.2 returned the set unrepaired stating that the set is having inherent manufacturing defect and advised the complainant to contact with the OP.3 for a new set.  The complainant submitted that in spite of efforts, the handset could not be repaired due to inherent manufacturing defect and hence alleging defects in goods, he filed this case praying the Forum to direct the Ops to refund the cost of the handset at Rs.1999/- with interest @ 18% p.a. from 24.9.2015 and to pay Rs.15, 000/- towards compensation and costs to the complainant.

2.                     In spite of valid notice the Ops neither filed counter nor participated in the proceeding in any manner.  The complainant has filed certain documents along with affidavit in support of his case.  Heard from the complainant and perused the materials on record.

3.                     In this case, the complainant has filed retail invoice issued by the OP.1 in support of purchase of alleged handset at Rs.1999/-.  Hence the purchase of handset from OP.1 which is manufactured by OP.3 is proved.  The complainant stated that the handset soon after its use gave battery backup problem and after one month the key pad did not work properly for which he handed over the set to OP.2 who repaired the set but did not issue job sheet.  Again the handset was hand over to OP.2 on 30.11.15 vide job sheet No.1439 and the OP.2 found the defect as “T/P not working – receiver” and returned the set after 15 days.  Again after 3 months MIC problem noticed and the set became dead.  This time the set was received by OP.2 on 29.4.16 but the set was returned to the complainant after 20 days un repaired stating that the set is having inherent manufacturing defect.  Thus the complainant is suffering.

4.                     The Ops in spite of valid notice did not prefer to contest their cases.  In absence of counter and participation of the Ops, we lost opportunity to know anything from them and the allegations of the complainant remained unchallenged.  Thus the case of the complainant is virtually proved to be good and we, therefore, hold that the set has got its inherent manufacturing defect.  Hence the complainant is entitled to get back the cost of the handset at Rs.1999/- with interest @ 12% p.a. from the date of purchase as he has not used the handset comfortably after purchase.  Further due to such inaction of the Ops, the complainant must have suffered some mental agony and has come up with this case incurring some expenditure.  Considering his sufferings, we feel a sum of Rs.1000/- towards compensation and cost in favour of the complainant will meet the ends of justice.

5.                     Hence ordered that the complaint petition is allowed in part and the OP.3 is directed to refund Rs.1999/- towards cost of the handset with interest @ 12% p.a. from 24.9.2015 in lieu of defective handset and to pay Rs.1000/- towards compensation and costs to the complainant within 30 days from the date of communication of this order.

(to dict.)