R.Ashwin Singaravelan filed a consumer case on 16 Jun 2016 against M/s.TVS Electronics in the North Chennai Consumer Court. The case no is CC/11/2016 and the judgment uploaded on 13 Jul 2016.
Complaint presented on : 16.12.2015
Order pronounced on : 16.06.2016
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (NORTH)
2nd Floor, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C.Nagar, Park Town, Chennai-3
PRESENT: THIRU.K.JAYABALAN, B.Sc., B.L., : PRESIDENT
TMT.T.KALAIYARASI, B.A.B.L., : MEMBER II
THURSDAY THE 16th DAY OF JUNE 2016
C.C.NO.11/2016
R.Ashwin Singaravelan, 19 yrs.
Son of K.Rahavan,
No:21/16, Dewan Rama Road,
Purasawalkam,
Chennai – 600 084.
..... Complainant
..Vs..
1.Flipkart Internet Private Limited, Rep. by its CEO., Vaishnavi Summit, Ground Floor, Koramangala Industrial Layout, Next to Wipro Office, Corporation Ward No. 68, Koramangala, Bangalore – 560 034, Karnataka.
2.WS Retail Service Pvt Ltd., Rep by its Director, No:42/1 & 43, Kancherakanahalli Village, Hoskote Taluk, Bangaluru, PIN:560 067, Karnataka State.
3. HTC India Private Ltd (Dopod), Rep by its CEO., G4 BPTP Park Centre, Sector – 30, Near NH-8, Gurgaon, Haryana PIN: 122 001. 4. TVS Electronics, Rep.by its Chairman, A4, First Floor, Gemini Parsn Commercial Complex, No:1, Kodambakkam High Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600 006.
|
| |
.....Opposite Parties |
|
Date of complaint 15.02.2016
Counsel for Complainant : Party in person
Counsel for Opposite parties :Ex – parte
O R D E R
BY PRESIDENT THIRU. K.JAYABALAN B.Sc., B.L.,
This complaint is filed by the complainant u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.1986.
1.THE COMPLAINT IN BRIEF:
The Complainant placed an order to purchase HTC One M9+ Mobile Phone on 31.07.2015 through the 1st Opposite Party website. The cost of the said mobile phone is Rs.38,084/- which was paid by the Complainant through online and the said amount was debited from his account maintained in the City Union Bank. Next day 01.08.2015 the 2nd Opposite Party /courier delivered the product to the Complainant. The 3rd Opposite Party is the manufacturer of the said product and the 4th Opposite Party is the authorised service provider of the HTC Mobile Phone. On 15.08.2015 the Complainant fell down from his two wheeler vehicle and the above mobile phone also fell down and mobile screen was damaged. The Complainant went to the 4th Opposite Party service provider to repair the product. The 4th Opposite Party replied that the 1st Opposite Party is the authorised seller and hence declined to attend the mobile phone. Then the Complainant contacted the manufacturer on 18.08.2015, even after his advice the 4th Opposite Party refused to give estimate of repair and to attend the same and then through the 1st Opposite Party Customer Care Unit the Complainant contacted and thereafter the 4th Opposite Party attended the repair on payment of charges. The Complainant is entitled for the warranty for his HTC Mobile Phone as in the on line shopping website. The warranty also not provided to the Complainant. Hence the Complainant issued legal notice about the deficiencies committed by the Opposite Parties. Since the 4th Opposite Party has not rectified the defect, the Complainant filed the Complaint seeking various reliefs and also compensation for mental agony with cost of the Complaint.
2. Though the Opposite Parties 1 to 4 received notice they did not appear and hence they were set ex- parte.
3. The Complainant filed proof affidavit Ex.A1 to Ex.A13 were marked and written arguments of the Complainant also filed. The oral argument of the Complaint is heard.
4. POINTS FOR CONSIDERATION:
1. Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties?
2. Whether the complainant is entitled to any relief? If so to what relief?
5. POINT NO :1
The Complainant placed an order under Ex.A1 to purchase the HTC One M9+ Mobile Phone with the 1st Opposite Party on 31.07.2015 and to purchase the said product the Complainant paid the cost of the product of Rs.38,084/- from his account under Ex.A4 and on the next day the 2nd Opposite Party/ courier delivered the product to the Complainant and Ex.A5 is the purchase bill of the product. The 3rd Opposite Party is the manufacturer and the 4th Opposite Party is the authorised service provider of the 3rd Opposite Party.
6. On 15.08.2015 the Complainant fell down from his vehicle and the mobile phone also at the time fell down and the mobile screen was damaged and to repair the product the Complainant contacted the 4th Opposite Party and the 4th Opposite Party refused to service the product, since the 1st Opposite Party is not the authorized seller of the 3rd Opposite Party and further even at the intervention of the 3rd Opposite Party the 4th Opposite Party refused to repair the product. There is no contra evidence on behalf of the Opposite Parties and therefore refused to service the product is Deficiency in Service.
7. However, at the instance of the Complainant and after instructed by the 1st Opposite Party, the 4th Opposite Party attended the service after receiving payment and the same was evidenced through the documents Ex.A17 to Ex.A19. Even after such repair the product still has defect and failed to remove the defect by the 4th Opposite Party is Deficiency in Service on his part. As a manufacturer the 3rd Opposite Party and the seller/ 1st Opposite Party are also liable for the deficiencies committed by the 4th Opposite Party and therefore, we hold that the Opposite Parties 1st, 3rd, & 4th have committed Deficiency in Service. The 2nd Opposite Party courier service has only delivered the product and therefore he has not committed any Deficiency in Service.
8. POINT NO : 2
According to the Complainant the product is not working and therefore he wants new product with warranty and also compensation for mental agony. Since the product is not working the Complainant needs for replacement with new product is sustainable and hence it has to be ordered that 1st and 3rd Opposite Party can be directed to replace a new product with required warranty to the Complainant. The Complainant suffered with mental agony is acceptable and for which a sum of Rs.10, 000/- can be ordered, besides a sum Rs.5,000/-litigation expenses.
In the result, the Complaint is partly allowed. The 1st & 3rd Opposite Party jointly or severally are ordered to replace the defective HTC one M9+ Mobile Phone with new Mobile Phone and warrantee within a period of 6 weeks from the date of this order, failing which the above said Opposite Parties are directed to refund the product cost of Rs.38,084/-(Rupees thirty eight thousand and eighty four only) The Opposite Parties 1st, 3rd & 4th jointly or severally further ordered to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) towards compensation for mental agony, besides a sum of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only) towards litigation expenses.
The above amount shall be paid to the Complainant within 6 weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order failing which the above said amount shall carry 9% interest till the date of payment. The Complaint against the 2nd Opposite Party and in respect of other reliefs this Complaint is dismissed.
Dictated to the Steno-Typist transcribed and typed by her corrected and pronounced by us on this 16th day of June 2016.
MEMBER – II PRESIDENT
LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE COMPLAINANT:
Ex.A1 dated 31.07.2015 | Specifications of HTC one M9+ Mobile |
Ex.A2 dated 31.07.2015 Preview of HTC one M9+ Mobile
Ex.A3 dated 31.07.2015 G mail – Shipment of items in order
OD003518291633513600 by Flipkart
Ex.A4 dated 31.07.2015 Online Transfer of funds through bank account in
city Union Bank
Ex.A5 dated 31.07.2015 Retail Invoice/Bill
Ex.A6 dated 01.08.2015 G mail – Insurance Service Pack successfully
Activated
Ex.A7 dated 22.08.2015 G mail – Acknowledgement mail of complaints
from HTC
Ex.A8 dated 23.08.2015 Conversation with HTC Executive
Ex.A9 dated 24.08.2015 Conversation with HTC Executive
Ex.A10 dated 26.08.2015 Conversation with Flipkart Executive
Ex.A11 dated 26.08.2015 Acknowledgement mail of complaints from
Flipkart
Ex.A12 dated 01.09.2015 Conversation with Flipkart Executive
Ex.A13 dated 12.09.2015 Notice to Opposite Parties 1 to 3
Ex.A14 dated 15/16.09.2015 Acknowledgement of service of Notice to Opposite
Parties 1 to 3
Ex.A15 dated 16.09.2015 Conversation with Flipkart Executive
Ex.A16 dated 21.09.2015 Conversation with HTC Executive
Ex.A17 dated 29.10.2015 HTC Repair Report by 4th Opposite Party
Ex.A18 dated 31.10.2015 Retail invoice by 4th Opposite Party
Ex.A19 dated 31.10.2015 Service Report by 4th Opposite Party
Ex.A20 dated 03.11.2015 Insurance claim issue
Ex.A21 dated NIL Limited Warranty Statement
Ex.A22 dated 14.11.2015 Notice to Opposite Parties 1 to 4 by Registered
Post with acknowledgement due
Ex.A23 Dated 17.11.2015 CD Video Recordings in the office of the 4th
Opposite Party service center on 17th November,
2015 and the conversation Recordings with 1st
Opposite Party HTC and 2nd Opposite Party
Flipkart.
Ex.A24 dated 17/18.11.2015 Acknowledgement of service of Notice to Opposite
Parties 1 to 4
Ex.A25 dated 05.12.2015 Live chat service with HTC Executive
Ex.A26 dated 08.12.2015 Live HTC chat service
Ex.A27 dated 08.12.2015 Live chat service with HTC Executive-HTC
Executive abruptly closes.
Ex.A28 dated NIL HTC Repair Report
Ex.A29 dated 31.10.2015 Service Report
Ex.A30 dated 05.02.2016 Retail Invoice
MEMBER – II PRESIDENT
Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes
Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.