Orissa

Rayagada

CC/400/2016

Prasanta Kumar Panda - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s Tele Pont - Opp.Party(s)

Self

13 Dec 2017

ORDER

DISTRICT   CONSUMER  DISPUTES REDRESSAL    FORUM, RAYAGADA,

STATE:  ODISHA.

C.C. Case  No. 400 / 2016.                                       Date. 13  . 12 . 2017.

P R E S E N T .

Dr. Aswini  Kumar Mohapatra,                   President

Sri GadadharaSahu, .                               Member.

Smt.  Padmalaya  Mishra,                          Member

Sri Prasanta  Kuamar  Panda, S/O: Sri Suresh Chandra Panda, Niladri Bihar, 3^rd. lane, Po:Gunupur   Dist:Rayagada,State:  Odisha.                                                                                                                                                                                                            …….Complainant

Vrs.

1.The Manager, M/S. Tele point, 238, Bapuji Nagar,Bhubaneswar, Dist: Khurda.

2. The Manager, Syntech Technology India Pvt.  Ltd., F-2, Block No. B-1, Ground Floor, Mohan Co-operative Industrial Estate, Mathura Road, New Delhi,  110044.

3.The Manager, U.D. Steel  solutions Pvt. Ltd., Jessore Road, Flat No.9(B), Ground Floor, Kolkatta- 700089.                                      ……...Opp.Parties

For the Complainant:- Self.

For the O.P No. I:- In person.

For the O.P. No.2 & 3:- Exparte.

                                                J u d g e m e n t.

            The  present disputes arises out of the complaint petition filed by the above named complainant alleging deficiency in service  against  afore mentioned O.Ps for non refund  of mobile purchase price.  The brief facts of the case  has summarised here under.

                That the complainant has purchased the mobile  phone from  the O.P. No.1 and manufacturing  company having its retail/whole sale retail shop around  all the   states of India including the service centre.  The complainant has purchased one costly GIONEE M 5 mobile set from the O.P. No.1  vide cash receipt No. 35350 DT. 20.1.2016 having the IMEI No.869328022115542 & 15541 for a cash price of Rs. 13,200/- having a warranty of one year.  The said product is manufactured and marketed by the O.P. No.2 & 3. After purchase within three months the set is found  to be having inherent manufacturing in it as the  metal cover with glass on it has started bending (small curve)   and subsequently it has started trouble in its net working system and hanging. The set  was taken to the dealer and also to the service agent  at Rayagada   who inspected  the same and stated that it is having manufacturing  problem and refused to accept the said set. In view of the  constant problem the complainant prays the forum direct the O.Ps  to refund the cost of the mobile set Rs.13,200/-with  interest  and for causing the mental agony and financial loss award a cost of Rs.1,000/- and also award  cost of the litigation  and  such other relief  as the hon’ble forum deems fit and proper for the best  interest of justice.

                On being noticed the O.P. No.1  filed written version refuting the allegation made by the complainant and prays the forum to dismiss the complaint petition.

                On being noticed the O.Ps are absent on repeated call in spite of received notice from the  forum as  revealed from the postal receipt... The O.Ps neither entering in to appear before the forum nor filed their  written version inspite of more than  05 adjournments has been given  to them. Complainant consequently filed his memo and prayed to set exparte of the O.Ps.  Observing lapses of around one year  for which the objectives  of the legislature of the C.P. Act going to be destroyed to the prejudice of the interest of the complainant.  Hence after hearing from  the   complainant set the case  exparte against the O.Ps. The action of the O.Ps is against the principles of  natural justice as envisaged  under section  13(2) (b)(ii) of the Act. Hence the O.Ps. set exparte  as the statutory period  for filing of  written version was over to close the case with in the time frame permitted by the C.P. Act.                                                                                  

                During the exparte  hearing the complainant examined himself and proved the payment  of the  money  to the O.Ps. The complainant has also produced  the service job sheet including  warranty card relating to the above case. The complainant also argued  due to non repair of the above set the complainant suffered a lot of financial trouble  and mental agony. The complainant prays the forum as the  O.Ps  not heard any  grievance of the complainant till date   so the  O.Ps  be  directed to refund  purchase price   along with  bank interest.

In  the absence  of any  denial  by  way  of  written  version  from the side  of the O.Ps. it is  presumed that the allegations  levelled against   the  O.Ps. deemed  to have  been  proved.    The  complainant   had  paid  the  amount   for the good service  as per  warranty  card  which  intended      with the O.P and the  said payment is  made for the consideration for the said service.  When the O.Ps  have failed to  give such service  as per warranty card  for   which  the O.Ps  have   received   the  amount.   It is  deemed that the  O.Ps   were   callous to the allegations  and it amounts  to deficiency  of service.

In the  present case  the O.Ps . are jointly and several liable.

Hence to meet  the  ends  of  justice,  the following   order is  passed.

ORDER.

                In the result with these  observations, findings, discussion the complaint petition is allowed  in part on exparte against the O.Ps.

               

                The O.Ps 2 & 3 are  ordered to take back their product  and  refund price of the Gionee mobile  set   a sum of Rs. 13,200/- to the complainant.  The O.Ps are further ordered to pay Rs.500.00  towards litigation  expenses.

 

                The O.P. No.1 is directed to refer the matter to the O.Ps No.2 & 3 for early compliance of the above order.

                The O.Ps are  ordered to comply the above direction within one month from the date of  receipt of this order. Serve the copies of the order to the parties.

Dictated and corrected by me

Pronounced  on  this   13th .                day of     December, 2017.

Member.                                  MEMBER.                                                        PRESIDENT.