MR LAXMI NARAYAN PADHI, PRESIDENT…             The fact of the case in brief is that, the complainant had procured a mobile cell make Samsung bearing its IMEI No. 357392060179538, on dated 13/12/2014 from OP.No-01 by paying an amount of Rs.9,500/-. Just purchase of five months, the said mobile shows various problems like hang, network problem, low battery backup and automatically shutdown. So she approached the OP No.2 and handover the set for necessary repair, who updated the software and hand over the set to the complainant. After some days, the said set appears some more defects, hence she again approached the OP.no.2 on dt.26.09.15 and deposited the set requesting for replacement of the set with a new one but the OP.2 keeping the set until dt.29.09.15 and except formatting the software did nothing and on demand issued a job sheet to that effect on dt.29.09.2015 and said that the set has inherent problems which could not be rectify by him and advised the complainant to contact the OP.3 for more services. While the complainant approached the OP.3 through their toll free number i.e. 180030008282, there was no response. The complainant time and again approached the OP.3 to redress the matter but the entire requests were in futile.

            The complainant is a college going student and highly depends on her mobile to get internet and other educational facilities but she restrained from the same due to the inaction of OP.s. Hence she sustained great humility, physical discomfort financial hardship and mental agony. As thus she craves the leave of this forum and prayed to direct the OP.s to pay the price of handset along with a sum of Rs.50,000/- as compensation for such negligent and deficiency in service on the part of OP.s and any other relief as the Hon’ble forum deem fit and proper in the interest of justice.

2.         On the other hand the OP.s neither appeared nor filed any counter in spite of chances given to them for three months of its admission. Hence the OP.s set ex parte as envisaged in Sec.13(2)(b) of the provisions of C.P.Act.1986. The complainant has filed cash invoice of the alleged mobile and service job sheet along with warranty card of the set. The complainant has heard the case at length, perused the records and submissions considered.

            The consumer protection act is a socio economic beneficial law, intended for speedy delivery of justice to the aggrieved consumers and every complaint is supposed to be disposed off within a timeframe in consonance with the objects of the benevolent legislature. But inordinate delay in procurement of evidences and counter by the parties have emerged for reaching delirium to achievement of such objects.

3.         From the above submissions, it is found that the complainant has procured the mobile set on dt.13.12.2014 and the same found defect with in valid warranty period of one year. As per warranty conditions, the complainant approached the OP.s to mend the set, appearing as above troubles, but the OP.s neither repaired the set nor replaced the same with a new one despite requests. Perusing the evidence, submissions by the complainant, we are of the view that, the alleged mobile set purchased by the complainant has inherent manufacture defect and the OP.s failed to provide service to the complainant. Thus the complainant restrained from the facilities for which she purchased the mobile from her long accumulated money, hence suffered from mental tension with the defective set, and also inflicted financial losses and valuable times, hence she under compelling circumstances file the instant case and prayed for compensation.

4.         From the above facts and perusing the submissions filed by the complainant, we have physically verified the alleged set and found problem and it is seen that, the OP.no.2 & 3 in spite of receiving notice of this forum are failed to take any initiation in the case and there is nothing to unbelief with the contentions of complainant unless adducing submission, counter and evidences by the OP.s, hence we feel that the action of OP.2 & 3 are adamant, illegal, arbitrary and highhanded which amounts to deficiency in service and the OP.s found guilty as per the provisions of the C.P.Act 1986, as thus the complainant is entitled for relief.

            The complaint is allowed against the OP.no.2 & 3 with costs.

                                                      O  R  D  E  R

i.          The opposite party no.2 & 3 supra are collaterally hereby directed to pay the price of the set i.e. Rs.9,500/- (Nine thousand & five hundred) inter alia, to pay Rs.9,000/-(Nine thousand) as compensation and a sum of Rs.5000/-(Five thousand) towards the cost of litigation to the complainant.

ii.         All the above directions shall be complied with in 30 days of this order, failing which, the total sum will carry 12% interest per annum till its realization.

            Pronounced in the open forum on this the 05th day of Jan' 2016.

    Sd/-                             Sd/-                           Sd/-

MEMBER               MEMBER             PRESIDENT, DCDRF,

                                                              NABARANGPUR.