Orissa

Rayagada

CC/192/2016

Manas Ranjan Rath - Complainant(s)

Versus

Naaptol Online Shopping Pvt. Ltd., - Opp.Party(s)

Self

30 Dec 2016

ORDER

DISTRICT   CONSUMER  DISPUTES  REDRESSAL FORUM, RAYAGADA,

C.C. Case No.192/ 2016

 

P R E S E N T .

Sri Pradeep Kumar Dash, LL.B                                     President

Sri Gadadhara Sahu, B.Sc.                                            Member 

            Manas Ranjan Rath, Son of Haramohan Rath, C/o Ganesh Mishra, village Hatipathar Road, Raniguda Farm, Rayagada,765001.                                                                                                                                            ………..Complainant

                                                            Vrs

Naaptol Online Shopping Pvt. Ltd.,12 PL Solutions, Old No.B98,New No.B1331,New Ashok Nagar, Near Pandey Medicos,  New Delhi-110096.

                                                                                       …..….Opp.Parties

For the Complainant:   In Person

For the O.P:  Sri Manoj Verma & Associate Advocate.

                      JUDGMENT

                        The  facts of the case in brief is that  the complainant has a Ubislate 7DC Android 4.4.2 Kitkat Tablet Smartphone   from the Opp.Party   on  dt.26/04/2016 with a consideration of Rs.3398/- vide Order No.22215797  but  after its   purchase  the mobile phone started trouble  and it was not updated for which the complainant immediately contacted the OP  and made complaint but after several complaints of the petitioner the OP failed to replace the same . Hence the complainant finding no other option prays before this forum  to direct the O.P  to refund price of  the mobile set      and  award compensation  along with cost  for litigation . Hence this complaint.

 

            On being noticed, the O.ps appeared through their advocate and filed written version inter alia denying their petition allegations on all its material particulars.  It is submitted by the O.P that the  complainant has placed  order for the product namely Datawind Calling Tablet vide order No.22215797  and after receipt of the order the OP forwarded it to the  concerned seller  for delivery and the concerned seller  dispatched a fresh and good quality product in working condition and delivered  it to the complainant through courier company and obtained Rs.3398/-.  The above product carry one year warranty  and according to the policy if any defect is found in the product within the warranty period then the product is been repaired on free of cost , if repair work is not possible then the product is replaced and if a in the event of both remedies are not satisfy to the customer then the price of the product is  refunded to the customer.  After receipt of complaint  the troubleshoot team  resolved the issue regarding the  complaint of the complainant and also provided service centre number and informed him to visit his nearest service centre for resolution of the problem and thereafter no complaints are found to be made by the complainant in respect of the said product. There is no deficiency in service on the part of OP and therefore not liable to pay any compensation  and prayed to dismiss the complaint.

   FINDINGS

 

                        Heard and perused the complaint petition and documents filed by the complainant and we accept the grievance of the complainant. The Complainant  argued that the O.ps have sold a defective  mobile set  to the complainant and claimed that the O.ps caused deficiency in service and deprived of the complainant of enjoyment of the mobile set  since the date of  its purchase  which caused mental agony and harassment to the complainant.

Now we have to see whether there was any negligence of the Ops  in providing  after sale service  to the complainant as alleged ?

We perused the documents filed by the complainant.  Since the mobile set found defective after its purchase    and   the complainant  informed the Ops regarding the defect but the  Ops   failed to remove  the defect . At this stage we hold that  if the mobile set  require  servicing since  the date of its purchase, then it can be presumed that it is defective one and if the defective mobile set  is sold to the complainant , the complainant is entitled to get refund of the price of the article or to replace a new  one or  remove the defects  and also the   complainant is entitled  and has a right to claim compensation and cost to meet his mental agony , financial loss.  In the instant case  as it is appears that the mobile set  which was purchased by the complainant had developed  defects and the O.ps were unable to restore its normal functioning during the warranty period. It appears that the complainant invested  a substantial amount and purchased the mobile set  with an expectation to have the effective benefit of use of the article. In this case, the complainant was deprived of getting beneficial use of the article and deprived of using the mobile set  for such  and the defecates were not removed by the O.ps who  know the defects from time to time from the complainant.

Hence, in our view the complainant has right to claim compensation to meet  his mental agony, financial loss. Hence,  it is ordered.

 

                                           ORDER

                        The  opposite parties  are directed to refund   the cost of  mobile set     and pay cost and compensation of Rs.1000/- . Further, we direct the Ops to pay the aforesaid award amount  within one month from the date of receipt of this order, failing which the O.Ps are liable to pay  interest  @  12%  p.a. on the above awarded amount till  the date of payment. Accordingly the complaint is allowed.

                        Pronounced in open forum today on this 26^th day December,2016 under the seal and signature of this forum.

                       

 

                         A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements , be forwarded to the parties    free of charge.

 

 

            Member                                                                                               President

Documents relied upon:

By the complainant:

1. Xerox copy of  order details and warranty
2. Xerox copy of  letter of OP

 By the Opp.Party:  Nil

                                                                                                           President