DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, NORTH-WEST
GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI
CSC-BLOCK-C, POCKET-C, SHALIMAR BAGH, DELHI-110088.
CC No: 1304/2016
D.No._______________________ Date: __________________
IN THE MATTER OF:
Mrs. POONAM GULATI,
S/o SH. GULSHAN KUMAR GULATI,
R/o H. No.-23/10, 1st FLOOR,
SHAKTI NAGAR CHOWK, DELHI.… COMPLAINANT
Versus
1. M/s S G SOLUTIONS,
THROUGH ITS DIRECTOR,
HAVING ITS REGD. ADDRESS AT:
OFFICE No.11, CSC-4, SECTOR-2,
ROHINI, NEAR HDFC BANK ATM,
NEW DELHI-110085.
2. M/s SPICE HOTSPOT,
THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR,
HAVING ITS REGD. ADDRESS AT:
D-131, KAMLA NAGAR,
NEW DELHI-110007. … OPPOSITE PARTY(IES)
CORAM:SH. M.K. GUPTA, PRESIDENT
SH. BARIQ AHMED, MEMBER
MS. USHA KHANNA, MEMBER
Date of Institution: 20.12.2016 Date of decision:05.11.2019
SH. M.K. GUPTA, PRESIDENT
ORDER
1. The complainant has filed the present complaint against OPs under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 thereby alleging that on 26.03.2014, the complainant purchased one mobile handset model Samsung G-T-8262 bearing IMEI no. 357910
CC No.1304/2016 Page 1 of 5
055639315 for Rs.12,900/- vide invoice no. 103052193 from OP-2. The complainant further alleged that on the same day, OP-1 approached the complainant and offered to get this product insured and the agent also told the complainant that the subscription will be for two years and it will cover all the damages like theft or accidental damage as the policy offered by OP-1 was an insurance policy and the complainant agreed and paid the full subscription amount i.e. Rs.1,290/- for 2 years from the date of purchase of the product on 26.03.2014. On 17.03.2016, the complainant lost the said product at Shakti Nagar Chowk and immediately reported the same to the P.S. Crime Branch vide SO No. 430/2014. Thereafter the said report the complainant on 18.03.2016 went to local police station and enquired about the missing mobile handset but police official did not even bother to hear the grievances of the complainant, moreover they said that we are having more than 40 complaints regarding mobile handset theft/loss but we are not free to resolve these petty issues. On 24.03.2016, the complainant approached to OP-2 but OP-2 had shown their inability to help and asked the complainant to approach OP-1 &said that if the mobile handset was insured then go to the insurance company and claim the money. On 26.03.2016, the complainant went to the office of OP-1 and submitted the grievances to OP-1 and after hearing the grievances, OP-1 promised to refund the insured amount as agreed
CC No.1304/2016 Page 2 of 5
but after completion of some formalities and in the 1st week of April-2016, the complainant again went to the office of OP-1 for refund as promised by OP-1 on the last date but this time the staff of OP-1 flatly refused to help the complainant and refused to pay any compensation to the complainant. Thereafter, the complainant called on the helpline i.e. Toll Free No. 180030002225 which was givenon subscription receipt of OP-1 but it was not valid and the complainant made several calls to OPs but both OPs did not pay any heed to the complainant’s grievances and the complainant went to the office of OPs on her own expenses and is liable to refund and compensate the complainant and the complainant has suffered a loss and further alleged that there is deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of OPs.
2. On these allegations the complainant has filed the complaint praying for direction to OPs to refund the amount of Rs.12,900/- alongwith interest @ 18% as well as compensation of Rs.20,000/- for mental, physical agony and harassment and also sought Rs.10,000/- towards cost of litigation.
3. Notices to OPs were issued through speed post for appearance on 21.03.2017 and the notice to OP-1 was served on 23.01.2017 and the notice to OP-2 was served on 24.01.2017 as per track reports but none has appeared on behalf of OPs and as such OPs were proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 21.03.2017.
4. In order to prove her case, the complainant filed her affidavit in
CC No.1304/2016 Page 3 of 5
evidence and has also filed written arguments. The complainant has also placed on record copy of tax invoice no. 103052193 dated 26.03.2014 for a sum of Rs.12,900/- issued by Spice Retail Ltd., New Delhi regarding purchase of the mobile handset, copy of Cashless Claim vide subscription no. #SG 19096 dated 26.03.2014 issued by OP-1 and copy of FIR no.254119/2016 dated 17.03.2016.
5. This forum has considered the case of the complainant in the lightof evidence of both the parties and documents placed on record bythe complainant. The case of the complainant has remained consistent and undoubted. There is nothing on record to disbelieve the case of the complainant. Moreover, it appears thateven after receiving notices of this case from this forum, the OPs have kept mum and have not bothered to answer the case of the complainant. It seems that OPs have no defence at all in their favour.
6. On perusal of the record, we find that the complainant made complaint of her mobile handset to the OPs within warranty period. As such OP-1being the insurer ought not to have refused to refund the price of the lost mobile handset. It was the duty of OP-1either to give a new mobile handset of the same price to the complainant or to refund the amount. Acustomer/consumer is not expected to file complaint in respect of new product purchased. Accordingly, OP-1 being the insurer is held guilty of unfair trade practice and deficiency in service. It is on record that the complainant has used the mobile handset for about 1 year and 11 months.
CC No.1304/2016 Page 4 of 5
7. Accordingly, OP-1 is directed as under:
i) To pay to the complainant an amount of Rs.5,000/- being the depreciated value of the mobile handset on return of accessories, original invoice.
ii) To pay to the complainant an amount of Rs.3,000/- ascompensationtowards mental agony and harassment caused to the complainant which includes cost of litigation.
8. The above amount shall be paid by OP-1 to the complainant within 30 days from the date of receiving copy of this order failing which OP-1 shall be liable to pay interest on the entire awarded amount @ 10% perannum from the date of receiving copy of this order till the date of payment. If OP-1 fails to comply the order within 30 days from the date of receiving copy of this order, the complainant may approach this Forum u/s 25 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
9. Let a copy of this order be sent to each party free of cost as per regulation 21 of the Consumer Protection Regulations, 2005. Thereafter file be consigned to record room.
Announced on this 5thday of November, 2019.
BARIQ AHMED USHA KHANNA M.K. GUPTA
(MEMBER) (MEMBER) (PRESIDENT)
CC No.1304/2016 Page 5 of 5
