Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

CC/219/2016

R.Prabhakar - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s.Micromax Informatic Limited - Opp.Party(s)

N.Premalatha and Others

21 Feb 2017

ORDER

                                      Date of Filing :   10.06.2016
                                 Date of Order :   21.02.2017
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (SOUTH)
     2nd Floor, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C. Nagar, Park Town, Chennai-3

PRESENT: THIRU. S. PANDIAN, B.Sc., L.L.M.                       : PRESIDENT             
                 TMT. K.AMALA, M.A. L.L.B., CLP                               : MEMBER I
               DR. T.PAUL RAJASEKARAN, M.A  ,D. Min. PGDHRDI, AIII,BCS : MEMBERI 

C.C.NO.219/2016
TUESDAY THIS  21TH  DAY OF FEBRURAY 2017

R. Prabhakar, 
S/o. A. Ramachandran, 
Plot No. 1401, New No.40, 
A-2, Darshan Apts, 
15th Main Road, 
H-Block, Anna Nagar West, 
Chennai 600 040.                                             ..Complainant

                                              ..Vs..

1.  Micromax Informatics Limited, 
Rep. by  Authorized Signatory, 
Micromax House, 
90B, Sector-18, Gurgaon, 
Pin Code 122 016.  

2. Reliance Mobile Stores Enterprises, 
Rep. by Authorized Signatory, 
No.4, Haddows Road, 
Nungambakkam, 
Chennai 600 006. 

3. Mobi Vision, 
Rep. by Authorized Signatory, 
Old No.61, New No.149, 
Kodambakkam High Road, 
T.Nagar, Chennai 600 001.                              ..Opposite parties. 

For the Complainants               :    M/s. N. Premalatha & others.       
For the opposite parties               :    Exparte. 

ORDER
THIRUMATHI.K.AMALA,   ::    MEMBER-I
 This complaint is filed by the complainant against the opposite parties to refund the amount of Rs.2,700/- collected towards the price of the mobile set with interest and also to pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- towards mental agony and hardship and also to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- as cost of the complaint.  
1.  The averment of the complaint are brief as follows: 
The complainant purchased a Micromax mobile phone on 6.12.2014 from the Reliance Mobile stores the 2nd opposite party herein for a sum of Rs.2,700/-.    Warranty card was also issued to the product for the period of 12 months.   Within few months from the date of purchase the mobile phone was not working properly hence it was given for repair to the 3rd opposite party who is the authorized service agent within the warranty period.   Job sheet was also issued dated 5.5.2015.   
2.    However inspite of repeated reminders and personal visit to the 2nd & 3rd opposite parties the mobile phone was neither repaired nor returned to the complainant.  He also registered  a complaint with the 1st opposite party vide email dated 8.5.2015 and complaint number was also given.  Thereafter the complainant sent a number of mails on various dates to the customer care of the opposite party, but no fruitful result came out.   The opposite party failed to repair or provide with new instrument therefore the complainant sent legal notice to the opposite party, though it was acknowledged by them they failed to send any reply. Even on 16.1.2016 the complainant sent an email addressed to Mr.Vineeth Taneja of the 1st opposite party but there was no response.  Therefore there is  complete deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties and the complainant is put to undue hardship and  mental agony due to their act.  Therefore the complainant is entitled to a sum of Rs.2700/- towards cost of the mobile along with interest and also compensation.   Hence the complaint is filed.          
3.    Inspite of receipt of notice the opposite parties did not appear before this forum and therefore they were set exparte. 
4.    Though the opposite parties remained expate this  Forum wants to dispose this compliant fully on merits with available materials before this forum.  
5.    In such circumstances,  in order to prove the allegation made in the complaint the proof affidavit is filed by the complainant as his evidence, and also Ex.A1 to  Ex.A5  are marked.  
6.    At this juncture the point for consideration before this Forum is: 
1.    Whether there is any deficiency of service on the part of the opposite  parties as alleged in the complaint?. 

2.    To what other reliefs, the complainant is entitled for? 
7.  POINT No. :1     
     It is seen from the facts of the complaint and proof affidavit and the documents on record that the complainant had purchased a Micromax mobile on 6.12.2014  manufactured by the 1st opposite party from the 2nd opposite party for a sum of Rs.2700/-.   The invoice which is Ex.A1 also proves the same.   The grievance of the complainant is that within two months from the date of purchase the mobile phone was not working properly and he gave the said product to the 3rd opposite party who is the authorized service centre of the 1st opposite party and inspite of job sheet was issued for the same vide Ex.A2, the 3rd opposite party failed to rectify the defects nor returned the mobile phone.  Therefore he sent several emails to the customer care of the 1st  opposite party and also sent legal notice to the opposite parties to return the cost of the product or replace with a new one. The Ex.A3,Ex.A4 & Ex.A5 also proves the same. But the opposite parties failed to comply the grievance of the complainant.   
8.    It is seen that the product was not working within the warranty period and the product was received by the 3rd opposite party on 5.5.2015  for repair and till date the mobile phone was neither rectified nor returned to the opposite party.    Though the opposite party sent reply email to the complainant  the same reveals that there was no fruitful result to the grievance of the complainant.  Once the mobile is received for service, it is the duty of the 3rd opposite party to rectify the defect to full satisfaction of the customer.     Whereas he has failed  to do so and further the 1st opposite party as a manufacturer of the product had also failed to initiate any steps to direct the 3rd opposite party to rectify the defect.  It is also seen that till date the mobile phone is under the custody of the 3rd opposite party  As such the contention of the complainant that without the mobile phone he was put into undue hardship and mental agony is also acceptable.    
9.    Further it is also clear that the act of the opposite parties in not returning the mobile phone after rectifying the defect and also in not returning the cost of the product amounts to deficiency in service.     The complainant also proved the deficiency in service committed by the opposite parties by means of relevant evidence beyond all doubts.  Though sufficient opportunity was given to the opposite parties they have not come forward to appear before this forum in order to refute the contention of the complainant, therefore an adverse inference can easily be drawn against the opposite parties, since there is no any contra evidence.  Thus the point no.1 is answered.  
10.    POINT No.2. 
As per decision arrived in point No.1 the complainant is entitled for refund of a sum Rs.2,700/- towards cost of the complaint mentioned mobile and also for a sum of Rs.2000/- towards compensation for mental agony and a sum of Rs.2,000/- as cost of the complaint. The compensation claimed by the complainant is exorbitant  however considering the facts and circumstances of the case he entitled for just and reasonable compensation.   Thus point-2 is also answered accordingly. 
        In the result, the complaint is allowed in part.  Accordingly the opposite parties 1 to 3 are jointly and severally  directed to refund a sum of Rs.2,700/- (Rupees two thousand and seven hundred only)  towards cost of the complaint mentioned mobile and also to pay a sum of Rs.2000/- (Rupees Two thousand only) towards compensation for mental agony due to deficiency in service on the part of them and to pay a sum of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees two thousand only)  as cost of the complaint to the complainant.   
         The above amounts shall be payable within six weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of the order, failing which, the said mounts shall carry interest at the rate of 9% p.a till the date of payment. 
    Dictated by the Member-I to the Assistant, taken down, transcribed and computerized by her, corrected by the Member-I and pronounced by us in the open Forum on this the  21st   day  of  February  2017.

MEMBER-I                        MEMBER-II                             PRESIDENT.

Complainant’s side documents: 
Ex.A1-  6.12.2014    - Copy of Invoice and Warranty card. 
Ex.A2- 5.5.2015    - Copy of Job sheet, 
Ex.A3- 8.5.2015       - Copy of series of mails between the complainant and 
     29.7.2015    - 1st opposite party. 

Ex.A4- 7.9.2015    - Copy of legal notice issued to the opposite party with 
                             Acknowledgments. 

Ex.A5- 16.1.2016    - Copy of Mail of the complainant to opposite party-1. 

Opposite parties’ side documents:   .. Nil. 

MEMBER-I                        MEMBER-II                             PRESIDENT.