MR RAMSANKAR NAYAK, MEMBER … The complaint in brief is that, the above complainant purchased a Mobile Gionee S6, vide its IMEI No.861877030126709 on dated 13.01.2017 from OP.1 by paying Rs.22,000/-. Later purchase of few days the mobile set reported defect like over heat, hang, calling, display & camera problems. So the complainant approached the OP.No.2 to rectify the defects but the OP.2 being the authorized service center of Gionee mobiles though repaired the same but could not rectify the defects but he issued a job sheet to that effect. Further after its use the set appears the same issues, hence the complainant again approached the OP.2 but he averred that the set has some manufacture problem which is impossible on his part to do its repair. So the complainant approached the OP.3 through other opposite parties and requested to replace the same but for no action. Hence the complainant contends that, the said set has inherent defect but the OP.s neither repaired nor replaced the same with a new one within the warranty period, which amounts to deficiency in service. Hence, the complainant craves the leave of this forum seeking justice. For such illegal action of OP.s, the complainant inflicted great humility, financial hardship and mental agony, hence prayed the forum to direct the OP.s to pay the price of the said handset and a sum of Rs.30,000/- as compensation and cost.
2. The OP.1 appeared and filed his counter wherein he stated nothing except evasive denials. On the other hand the OP.2 & 3 neither appeared nor file any counter in spite of several chances in it’s admission. Hence they set ex parte as per Sec.13(2)(b) of the C.P.Act.1986. The complainant has filed copy of cash invoice, service job sheet of OP.2. The OP.no.1 & complainant heard the case at length, perused the record and submissions considered.
3. From the above submissions, it is found that the complainant has procured the mobile set on dt.13.01.2017 by paying an amount of Rs.22,000/- alluring better features but the same reported defect within a few days of its purchase i.e. within valid warranty period. Hence the complainant approached the OP.s for repair, but the OP.s neither repaired the set nor heard his requests. Considering the evidences, submissions by the complainant, we are of the view that, the mobile set in question has inherent problem and the OP.s provide a substandard set to the complainant for a good price and also failed to provide service to the complainant within warranty period. Thus the complainant sustained mental agony and also inflicted financial losses and valuable times due to the negligence, arbitrary and unfair practices of OP.s hence prayed for compensation.
4. It is noticed that, despite service of notice of this forum the OP.s are failed to take any step to settle the instant matter of complainant and there is nothing to decline the contentions of complainant without appearance, filing counter and evidences by the OP.s, hence we feel that the action of OP is highhanded and unfair which amounts to deficiency in service and hence they found guilty under the benevolent legislations of the C.P.Act 1986. However observing inherent defect in the said devise we allow the complaint against the OP.3 with cost.
ORDER
i. The opposite party no.3 supra is hereby directed to pay the price of mobile set in question i.e. Rs.22,000/- (Rupees Twenty Two thousand) in place of the alleged mobile set inter alia, to pay Rs.5,000/-(Five thousand) as compensation and a sum of Rs.2000/-(Two thousand) towards the cost of litigation to the complainant.
ii. All the above directions shall be complied with in 30 days of receipt of this order, failing which, the total sum will bear 12% interest per annum till its realization. Pronounced on this the 27th day of June' 2017.
sd/- sd/-
MEMBER MEMBER, DCDRF,
NABARANGPUR.
Date of Preparation:
Date of dispatch :
Date of received by
the A/A for Ops / Complainant :
Initial of the dispatcher.
