Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

CC/451/2014

R.Hariharan - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s.Cell Tech - Opp.Party(s)

R.Hariharan

23 Nov 2015

ORDER

                                                                          Date of Complaint  : 14.11.2014

                                                                 Date of Order           :23.11.2015

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (SOUTH)

2^nd Floor, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C. Nagar, Park Town, Chennai-3

 

PRESENT :    THIRU. B. RAMALINGAM, M.A.M.L.,                  :  PRESIDENT                     

                     TMT.K. AMALA, M.A. L.L.B.,                                :  MEMBER – I

                     DR.T.PAUL RAJASEKARAN, M.A PGDHRDI, AIII,BCS : MEMBER II

                                                     

C.C.No. 451 / 2014

THIS  MONDAY  23^RD   DAY OF  NOVEMBER 2015

 

R. Hariharan,

S/o. V.H. Ramanathan,

Flat H2, Seabrooke Apartments,

4^th Seaward Road,

Valmiki Nagar,

Thiruvanmiyur,

Chennai 600 041.                                                  .. Complainant.

                                                         - Vs-

1. Pantel Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Rep. by its Managing Director, E-33, Sector 63, Noida (U.P)., Pin No.201 301.         2. Cell Tech, Rep. by its Proprietor, 1st Floor, Cisons Complex, No.150, Montietch Road, Egmore, Chennai 600 008.                                                   .. Opposite parties.		.. Opposite party.

 

For the complainant                     :   Party in person    

For the opposite parties                         :   Exparte   

 

           Complaint under section 12  of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 for a direction to the opposite parties to pay a sum of Rs.8,268/- towards the cost of the defective penta tablet and also to pay a sum of Rs.80,000/- towards compensation for mental agony and deficiency in service and also to  pay a sum of Rs.3000/- as cost of the proceedings to the complainant.  

ORDER

THIRUMATHI.K.AMALA,   ::    MEMBER-I

Even after receipt of the notice, the opposite parties did not file written version.  Hence, the 2^nd opposite party was set exparte on  7.1.2015 and 1^st opposite party was set exparte on 20.2.2015.    The complainant filed proof affidavit.   Exhibits A1 to A24 were marked on the side of the complainant.  

2.     Perused the complaint, and the documents Ex.A1 to Ex.A24  filed by the complainant  and proof affidavit and the entire C.C. records and considered the arguments of the complainant person.  

 3.     The complainant submits that he purchased one Penta tablet for a sum of Rs.8,268/- on 3.6.2013 from the retailer of the 1^st opposite party at Chennai.   From the beginning itself it was difficult to connect the power charger to the tablet and the charger totally failed to connect the tablet and hence he gave the product to the 2^nd opposite party on 30.5.2014 for which they issued job sheet and sent the product to the 1^st opposite party.     But during September 2014 the 1^st opposite party sent an email to remit Rs.3050 in their Punjab National Bank account though the product was covered under warranty.  The complainant also remitted the said amount in the 1^st opposite party’s account with protest.  When the complainant received the product on 14^th October 2014 it was not working properly.   Hence he filed the above complaint for repayment of the cost of the Penta tablet along with compensation and cost of the complaint.

4.     The complainant purchased the product on 3.6.2013 is evidenced through Ex.A1.  The product which was given for repair to the 2^nd opposite party on 30.5.2014 was covered within the warranty period as per Ex.A2 namely warranty card. The complainant contends that they also issued job sheet Ex.A4 in which the original complaint No.111284 was deleted and they created a new complaint No.1112542 in order to prove that the product was out of warranty. The same is evidenced on perusal of the job sheet.  Moreover the clause (i) and (ii)  mentioned in the warranty card states that  “repair of the product within the warranty period is free of charge.”   The exclusion clause mentioned in the warranty card is not proved by the opposite party.   Hence the demand of payment of Rs.3,050/- towards cost of spare parts by the 1^st opposite party is unsustainable.  Inspite of it the complainant paid the said amount with protest which is evidenced through Ex.A19.    Further the contention of the complainant that the 1^st opposite party have not sent any document to show that they have spent Rs.3050/- for spare parts is acceptable.  Whereas the opposite party has not given any contra evidence to disprove the said contention.  

5.     The complainant had stated in his proof affidavit that on 15^th November 2014 the product become dead.   Hence he returned the same to the 2^nd opposite party for which they gave job sheet No.00126728 dated 24.11.2014 which is also evidenced through Ex.A23 wherein also it was mentioned as covered under warranty.    But they told him to pay a sum of Rs.250/- for handling charges.  The complainant also sent notice to the opposite parties but the opposite parties failed to appear before this forum.  The above contention is proved through Ex.A23 & Ex.A24.  Hence he contended that the opposite parties failed to provide customer service and prayed for refund of the cost of the product and also repayment of the repair charges of Rs.3050/- paid to the opposite parties.

6.     The submission made by the complainant that he gave the product for repair on 30.5.2014 and after five months the 1^st opposite party demanded Rs.3050/- as repair charges which was paid by the complainant under protest for which the opposite party failed to send the bill but sent the product only on October 2014 and even then the product was not working properly and as such the opposite parties have committed deficiency of service is acceptable.  

7.     Further the contention of the complainant that the opposite parties failed to provide proper service and caused mental harassment is also acceptable. 

8.     From the above facts and circumstances and also through necessary document on record it is clear that the repair charges of Rs.3050/- collected by the 1^st opposite party within the warranty period by violating the terms and conditions and also failed to repair it properly and subsequently again the product got repair and given for service which clearly shows that the opposite parties have committed deficiency of service and also caused mental agony to the complainant. 

9.     But the opposite parties failed to appear before this forum and gave any contra evidence to defend the case and hence they were set exparte. 

10.    Hence we are of the considered view that the opposite parties are jointly and severally directed to repair the B.S.N.L. Penta WS-802C-2G Tablet with keypad given to the 2^nd opposite party for repair on 24.11.2014 after receiving necessary charge for handling expenses if any within two months from the date of this order.   The opposite parties are also directed to refund a sum of Rs.3050/- collected as repair charges.  Further the opposite parties also directed to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- as just and reasonable compensation and also to pay a sum of Rs.2500/- towards litigation charges to the complainant.

In the result, the complaint is partly allowed.   The opposite parties are jointly and severally directed to repair the B.S.N.L. Penta WS-802C-2G Tablet with keypad given to the 2^nd opposite party for repair on 24.11.2014 after receiving necessary charge for handling expenses if any within two months from the date of this order.   The opposite parties are also directed to refund a sum of Rs.3050/- (Rupees three thousand and fifty only) collected as repair charges.   Further the opposite parties are also directed to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) as compensation and also to pay a sum of Rs.2500/- (Rupees two thousand and five hundred only) towards litigation charges to the complainant within six weeks from the date of this order failing which the amounts of (Rs.3050/- & Rs.10,000/) shall carry interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of order  passed till the date of realization. 

                Dictated directly by the Member-I to the Assistant, transcribed and computerized by her, corrected by the Member-I and pronounced by us in the open Forum on this the 23^rd     day of  November   2015.

 

 

MEMBER-I                                        MEMBER-II                                           PRESIDENT.

Complainant’s Side documents :

Ex.A1- 3.6.2013        - Copy of Invoice.

Ex.A2-                    -        - Copy of Warranty card.

Ex.A3-                    -        - Copy of printed advice on technical assistance.

Ex.A4-                    -        - Copy of service job sheet.

Ex.A5-                    -        - Copy of email of 27^th August and their acknowledgments.

Ex.A6-                    -        - Copy of email of 5^th September.

Ex.A7-                    -        - Copy of 1^st opposite parties mail of 5^th September.

Ex.A8-                    -        - Copy of email on same date at 6.30 p.m.  

Ex.A9-                    -        - Copy of 1^st opposite part email of 6^th September.

Ex.A10-         -        - Copy of reply for the same.

Ex.A11-         -        - Copy of email from 1^st opposite party and reply for the same.

Ex.A12-         -        - Copy  of 1^st opposite party email on 4.56 p.m.

Ex.A13-         -        - Copy of reply at 5.10.p.m.

Ex.A14-         -        - Copy of 1^st opposite party mail again at 5.12 p.m. and reply.

Ex.A15-         -       - Copy of mail the 1^st opposite party at 10.p.m. on September

                               8^th and their reply on 9^th September at 9.07 am.

 

Ex.A16-         -        - copy of mail to 1^st opposite party on 9^th September at 1.33 p.m.

 

Ex.A17-         -        - Copy of 1^st opposite party’s email on 9^th September at 1.57 p.m.

Ex.A18-         -        - Copy of mail by 2^nd opposite party to 1^st opposite party.

Ex.A19-         -        - Copy of mail by 2^nd opposite party on 16^th September.

Ex.A20-         -        - Copy of mail to 1^st opposite party and 2^nd opposite party on

                               15^th October 2014 and their reply.

 

Ex.A21-         -        - Copy of reply with copy of invoice on 16^th October.

 

Ex.A22-        -        - Copy of mail to opposite party on 17^th October 2014.

 

Ex.A23- 22.4.2015     - Copy of letter to the complainant by the complainant.

 

Ex.A24- 23.2.2015     - Copy of notice by the complainant to the opposite party.     

 

 

Opposite parties’ side documents: -    .. Nil ..   (exparte)

 

 

 

MEMBER-I                                         MEMBER-II                                          PRESIDENT.