Delhi

North East

CC/32/2015

Alok Jain - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s Wizart Digitek Computer - Opp.Party(s)

24 Mar 2016

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM: (NE)

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

D.C. OFFICE COMPLEX, BUNKAR VIHAR,

NAND NAGRI, DELHI-93

 

Complaint Case No.32/15

 

In the matter of:

 

	Shri Alok Jain S/o Late K.C. Jain R/o C-5/205 (Ground Floor), Yamuna Vihar, Delhi-110053.	Complainant
	Versus
	M/s Wizard Digitek Computers Pvt. Ltd C-6/232, Yamuna Vihar, Delhi-53 Through its Director   HTC India Pvt. Ltd. G-4, BPTP Park Centre, Sector-30, Near N.H.8, Gurgaon, Haryana-122001 Through its Managing Director   M/s S.K. Enterprises B-4 (Basement Floor), Alied House, Near Old Rohtak Road, Inderlok, Delhi-110035 Through its Proprietor.		Opposite Parties

 

	DATE OF INSTITUTION:	24.01.2015
	DATE OF DECISION      :	24.03.2016

 

 

 

 

N.K. Sharma, President:-

Nishat Ahmad Alvi, Member:-

Ms. Manju Bala Sharma, Member

 

Order

1.           The case of the complainant is that on 20.05.2014 complainant purchased a HTC Desire 700 mobile phone from OP1 vide IMEI No. 3517540609060282 for a sum of Rs. 22,800/-vide invoice No. 26162. From the very beginning the mobile phone was found defective and started hanging. On the advice of OP1 the complainant took the phone to OP3, the authorized service centre, and made a complaint. The phone was repaired but after one month again got defective and it was taken to OP3. After few days OP3 informed the complainant that some parts are needed to be repaired in order to get the phone in working condition. The complainant requested the Opposite Parties to replace the said mobile phone but they did not pay any attention. The complainant stated his grievances to the OPs but of no results and on 30.11.2014 complainant sent a letter to OPs mentioning all his grievances with the hope of settlement but all in vain. Pleading deficiency in service on the part of OPs complainant prayed that OPs be directed to either replace or pay the invoice amount of Rs. 22,800/- to the complainant, to pay Rs. 1,00,000/- towards compensation for the suffering of mental pain, agony and financial turmoil and Rs. 1000/- as cost of litigation.
2.           Notice was issued to all the OPs but nobody has entered appearance and hence were proceeded with ex-parte.
3.           Complainant filed its evidence by way of affidavit and corroborated the facts stated in the complaint.  The complainant has filed on record copy of invoice No. 26162 dated 20.05.2014 which shows that the complainant has purchased the above-said mobile phone from OP1, job sheet dated 13.10.2014 establishes that the mobile phone was within its warranty period and it is mentioned on the job sheet that the phone was defective for the reasons  ‘Battery Not Store, Airplane Mode Auto Activate & Hang Problem’,  copy of letter written by OP3 to complainant dated 05.11.2014 for non-availability of parts, complaint sent to OP on 30.09.2014 by e-mail and written complaint dated 30.11.2014 sent to OP1 and OP2.
4.           Heard the complainant and gone through the record. From the perusal of the record it is established that the complainant purchased the mobile in question from OP1.  Though the complainant stated that from the beginning the mobile was defective and he took the mobile to OP1 for its repair but he did not produce the copy of the job sheet to prove that he took the mobile phone to OP1 for curing its defects in the beginning.  The job sheet which he placed on record is dated 13.10.2014.  Hence it can be safely presumed that the complainant used the mobile phone in question from 20.05.2014, the date of its purchase to 13.10.2014 when it was deposited with OP1 for its rectification. 
5.           Thus the complainant has established his case while the OPs chose not to appear and controvert the allegations levelled against them.  Hence complainant’s case is deemed to be proved. 
6.           We hold all the OPs guilty of deficiency in service jointly and severally and direct them to pay to the complainant Rs.15,000/-, cost of the mobile phone, considering that the complainant has used the mobile phone for approximately 5 months, Rs.10,000/- as compensation for the harassment and suffering of the complainant and Rs.1,000/- as cost of litigation.
7.           The above order shall be complied with within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of this order. 
8.           Let a copy of this order be sent to each party free of cost as per regulation 21 of the Consumer Protection Regulations, 2005.
9.                     File be consigned to record room.
10.                     Announced on 24.03.2016.    

 

( N.K. Sharma) President

(Nishat Ahmad Alvi) Member

(Manju Bala Sharma) Member