Kerala

Idukki

CC/117/2022

KURIAN ISSAC - Complainant(s)

Versus

NEO LIGHT - Opp.Party(s)

27 Feb 2023

ORDER

DATE OF FILING : 15/07/2022

IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, IDUKKI

Dated this the 27^th day of March 2023

Present :

              SRI.C.SURESHKUMAR                                               PRESIDENT

              SMT.ASAMOL P.                                                          MEMBER

              SRI.AMPADY K.S.                                                        MEMBER

CC NO.117/2022

Between

Complainant                              : Kurian Issac,

                                                     Vathalloor House, 6^th Mile Kumily Kara,

                                                     Kumily Village, Udumbanchola Taluk,

                                                     Kerala, Pin – 685 509.

                                                     (By Adv.Shiji Joseph)

                                                           And

Opposite Party                        :  1 . Neo Light A12/163 A

                                                        Shalimar Garden Ex-2 Sahibabad

                                                        Gaziyabad Uttarpradesh – 201005,

                                                         Represented by its Manager.

                                                    2 . Xiaomi Technology India Pvt, Ltd.,                 

                                                          Embassy Tech Village – 1 Block – E

                                                          Orchid Devarabisanahalli Bellandoor  

                                                          Bengalore, Karnataka 560 103,                             

                                                          Represented by its Chairman and  

                                                                                   Managing Director.

                                                          (By Adv.Siby Jacob)

                                                    3 .  G Mobiles & Electronics,       

                                                          Kanjiramthanam Building,

                                                          Near Simi Cycles Bus Stand, Kattappana,

                                                          Pin 685 508, Represented by its Manager

                                                    4 .  Amazone India Pvt.Limited,

                                                          Brigade  Gateway, 8^th Floor, 26/1,               

                                                          Dr.Rajkumar Road,  Malleshwaram (W),

                                                          Bangalore – 560 055, Karnataka, India.

 

 

 

(Cont......2)

-2-

 

 

O R D E R

SMT.ASAMOL P., MEMBER

 

Complainant filed this complaint under S.35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019.  Brief facts of this complaint are discussed hereunder:-

 

1 . On 11/11/2021, complainant purchased Mi A3 phone from 1^st opposite party through Amazon online business platform by exchanging  complainant’s old phone for Rs.4,750/- and paying Rs.9,249/- in addition to it.  In the online site, 4^th opposite party has advertised that the mobile phone is a brand new product having 1 year warranty.  Believing the advertisement of 4^th opposite party complainant purchased the phone.   2^nd opposite party is manufacturer.  3^rd opposite party is authorised service centre of 2^nd opposite party.  No relief is sought against 3^rd opposite party.

2 . In May 2022, within 6 month from the date of purchase, the phone  suddenly hanged and became not usable.  Complainant approached 3^rd opposite party service centre and the complainant had to pay Rs.564/- for repairing the mobile phone as the phone was activated on 18/03/2020 since the warranty had already expired.  Subsequently on payment of Rs.564/-, 3^rd opposite party had agreed to repair the phone.

3 . Complainant brought the phone for the purpose of using the same believing that the phone is a new one.  However the opposite parties 1, 2 and 4 were selling a used phone to the complainant after refurbishing the same.  Since the phone was used and refurbished, complainant felt that he was cheated and this caused severe mental agony.  This is unfair trade practice  on the part of opposite parties 1, 2 and 4.  4^th opposite party had done false advertisement there by enticing customers to purchase substandard products, hence 4^th opposite party is also liable to compensate complainant.

(Cont......3)

 

-3-

 

4 . After receiving huge amount, 1^st opposite party has given a substandard phone and 2^nd  and 4^th  opposite party also joined with 1^st opposite party to  sell a second hand phone to complainant.  Hence, opposite party 1, 2 and 4 are jointly and vicariously liable to pay compensate to complainant.

5 . The following  reliefs are prayed in the complaint.

a    .  Opposite parties 1, 2, and 4 may be directed to pay Rs.13,999/- to complainant with 14% interest from the date purchase of the phone to till the payment.

b . Opposite parties 1, 2 and 4 may be directed to pay Rs.15,000/- as compensation.

c . Opposite parties 1, 2 and 4 may be directed to pay Rs.5000/- as cost of complaint.

Notice was served to all opposite parties from this Commission.  But, nobody has not appeared.  Hence, they were called absent and set exparte.  After that, the case was posted for exparte evidence.  Complainant has filed proof affidavit.  Same is read in evidence.  Ext.P1 to P3 were marked and MO1 was also marked.  Heard the counsel for complainant.  Thereafter it was taken for orders.  Now, the points which arise for consideration are:-

(a) .  Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties?

(b) . If so, what reliefs are entitled to ?

 

 

(Cont......4)

 

-4-

 

Points are considered together

We have perused proof affidavit and marked documents.  Under Ext.P1, it is proved that complainant has purchased Xiaomi Mi A3 Mobile Phone from 1^st opposite party through 4^th opposite party on 10/11/2021.  Rs.13,999/- was paid by him as price of the mobile phone.  On the perusal of Ext.P2, we have found that the mobile phone was serviced and delivered to complainant by 3^rd opposite party on 21/05/2022.  In this document,  inspection remarks are seen that ELS fail and proximity sensor not working.  Complainant has paid Rs.564/- as service charge is seen in Ext.P2.  On these circumstances, it can be understood that the mobile phone was in faulty condition within 6 months from the date of purchase.  But, as per Ext.P3, it is found that complainant didn’t get the service with free of cost due to the reason of this alleged devise was activated on 18/03/2020.  We are of the considered view that the purchased mobile phone from  opposite parties was used and refurbished.  Because, it was activated on 18/03/2020, thereafter, it was sold to complainant on 10/11/2021.  This is unfair trade practice on the part of opposite parties.  Hence, complainant is entitled to get either replace the mobile phone or refund the price of it.  Sale of refurbished phone by passing it off as a new one is unfair trade practice as mentioned above.  Considering the circumstances, especially price of phone, we are of the view that further compensation of Rs.5000/- and litigation costs of Rs.2000/- will suffix to meet the ends of justice.   Complainant has stated that no reliefs are claimed against 3^rd opposite party.  As a result, complaint is partly allowed as hereunder.

1 . Opposite parties 1, 2 and 4 are directed to refund Rs.13,999/- as price of Mobile Phone and Rs.564/- paid for servicing it.

 

(Cont......5)

 

-5-

 

2 . Opposite parties 1, 2 and 4 are directed to pay Rs.5,000/- as compensation and Rs.2,000/- as litigation cost to complainant within 45 days from the date of receipt of order, failing which the amount except litigation cost shall carry 12% per annum from the date of order till its realization.

Extra copies to be taken back by parties without delay.

 Pronounced by this Commission on this the 27^th day of March, 2023.   

                                                                                         Sd/-                                                                           

                                                                                SMT.ASAMOL P., MEMBER                                                                                                             

                                                                                                  Sd/-

                                                                        SRI.C.SURESHKUMAR, PRESIDENT                                                                                                 

                                                                                                  Sd/-                                                                            

                                                                              SRI.AMPADY K.S., MEMBER

 

APPENDIX

Depositions :

On the side of the Complainant :

Nil

On the side of the Opposite Party :

Nil

Exhibits :

On the side of the Complainant :

Ext.P1  -  Invoice  dated 10/11/2021

Ext.P2  -  Copy of service record

Ext.P3  -  Fwd: 861612044512630_MiA3-IN-4GB+64GB-White//Activate date

                18/03/2020.

On the side of the Opposite Party :

Nil

 

                                                                                               Forwarded by Order  

 

 

                                                                                          ASSISTANT REGISTRAR