Haryana

Sonipat

CC/476/2016

Bupender - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s Sony India Pvt. Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Sandeep Gupta

16 Mar 2017

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SONEPAT.

 

 

                  Complaint No.476 of 2016

Instituted on: 05.12.2016                                                      

Date of order:  16.03.2017

 

 

Bhupender son of Vijay Pal c/o Vijay s/o Mahabir Singh resident of H.No.492/25, West Ram Nagar, Petrol Pump Wali Gali, Sonepat near Ashok Kiryana Store, Sonepat.

 

…Complainant.        Versus

 

1.Sony India Pvt. Ltd., with Regd. A-31, Mohan Co-op. Industrial Estate, Muthra road, New Delhi through its Authorized Officer.

2.Sony India Pvt. Ltd. Branch office and authorized service centre, shop no.1, Basement Tulip Mall, Gandhi Chowk, Sonepat through its dealing official.

 

                                                                                                                                …Respondents.

 

COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 12 OF

THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,1986

 

Argued by:Shri Sandeep Gupta Adv. for complainant.

          Shri Deepak Vats, Adv. for respondents.

 

Before-  Nagender Singh-President.

Prabha Wati-Member.

J.L. Gupta-Member.

 

 

O R D E R

 

         Complainant has filed the present complaint against the respondents alleging therein that he has purchased a mobile phone online through Snapdeal with invoice dated 27.10.2015 for Rs.9990/-.  The said mobile was having fully warranty of one year.  But the said mobile was not working properly since the date of its purchase. The mobile was deposited with respondent no.2 with repeated complaint of restart, display, audio jack, camera, battery etc.  Every time, the respondent no.2 used to take five to seven days for repair of the problem, but of no use. The complainant has requested the respondents several times to replace the same with new one, but of no use and that amounts to a grave deficiency in service on the part of the respondents. So, he has come to this Forum and has filed the present complaint.

2.       The respondents no.1 and 2 appeared and they filed their joint written statement submitting therein that the mobile in question was purchased by the complainant on 27.10.2015 worth Rs.9900/-.  As and when the complainant approached the respondent no.2, the defects were removed absolutely free of cost including free of cost replacement of part. But instead of appreciating the free of cost services, the complainant has filed the present complaint before this Forum. No harassment or humiliation has ever been suffered by the complainant at the hands of the respondents.   The complainant is not entitled for any relief & compensation and has prayed for the dismissal of the present complaint.

3.       We have heard the arguments advanced by the ld. Counsel for the complainant and respondents at length.  All the documents have been perused very carefully and minutely.

4.       In the present case, there is no dispute with regard to the fact that the complainant has purchased the mobile in question on 27.10.2015 worth Rs.9990/-.

         As per the complainant, for the first time, there has arisen defect in the mobile on 8.10.2016 and thereafter on 22.10.2016.  Meaning thereby, the mobile in question was working properly upto 8.10.2016 i.e. for about 11 months and 10 days.  Before expiry of almost 20 days of warranty period of one year, the complainant has started making complaints with regard to the defects in the mobile.

         The respondents’ plea is that as and when the complainant approached the respondent no.2, the defects were removed absolutely free of cost including free of cost replacement of part. But instead of appreciating the free of cost services, the complainant has filed the present complaint before this Forum. No harassment or humiliation has ever been suffered by the complainant at the hands of the respondents.

         The complainant has purchased the mobile phone worth Rs.9990/- and he has used it for about 11 months 10 days.  In our view, the ends of justice would be fully met if some directions are given to the respondents. Accordingly, we hereby direct the respondents to refund 50% amount of Rs.9990/- i.e. Rs.4995/- to the complainant within a period of 60 days from the date of passing of this order.

         The complainant by way of present complaint has sought the compensation to the tune of Rs.One Lakh on account of harassment, which in our view is on a very higher side.  However, we hereby direct the respondents further to compensate the complainant to the tune of Rs.2000/- (Rs.two thousand) for rendering deficient services, for harassment and further to pay a sum of Rs.2500/- (Rs.two thousand five hundred) under the head of litigation expenses. 

         The complainant is directed that in case the mobile in question is in his possession, then to return the mobile set alongwith its all accessories to the respondents within a period of 15 days from the date of passing of this order.  In case of any short accessories, the respondents will be at liberty to deduct the cost of that short accessory.

 

         With these observations, findings and directions, the present complaint stands allowed partly.

         Certified copy of this order be provided to both the parties free of costs.

         File be consigned after due compliance.

 

 

(Prabha Wati)  (J.L. Gupta)           (Nagender Singh)           

Member          Member                President, DCDRF

                                      Sonepat.

Announced 16.03.2017