Delhi

West Delhi

CC/14/624

Sunny Bhola - Complainant(s)

Versus

New Mobile Care - Opp.Party(s)

23 Sep 2014

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM (WEST)

GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI

150-151, Community Centre, C-Block, Janak Puri, New Delhi – 110058

                                                                        

                                                                         Date of institution  : 23.09.14

 

Case. No. DF-III/624/2014                                         Date of  order        : 03.02.16

In the matter of :-

Sh. Sunny Bhola,

KG 2/9 Vikaspuri,

New Delhi                                                                                         Complainant

Vs.

 

New Mobile Care India Pvt. Ltd.,

#201 Suneja Tower 2 District Centre,

Janak Puri, New Delhi110058                                                    O.P No.1

 

New Mobile Care India Pvt. Ltd.,

WZ-109, Street No.1, Sadh Nagar,

Palam Colony, New Delhi-110045.                                           O.P No.2

 

  (R.S. BAGRI, PRESIDENT)

O R D E R     

 

            The complainant Sh. Sunny Bhola has filed the present complaint U/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 with averments that he bought one Mobile Phone Hand set LAVA IRIS 504Q IMEI No. 911321250035370  for sale consideration of Rs. 12,600/- vide bill No. 19713 dated 16.8.2013.   On the same day he purchased a mobile care insurance from opposite party No.1 vide NMC No. 15465 .   The opposite party No.1 at the time of insurance assured the complainant that the insurance covers repair, replacement of physically damaged parts and water damage etc. of the Mobile Phone.   The mobile phone developed some fault on 9.5.14.  He approached the officials of opposite party

-2-

No.1, who sent his mobile phone to the service centre  and got the touch screen replaced .    The mobile phone was returned after 20 days.  But soon after he noticed touch screen problem with the mobile hand set.   He again approached the officials of the opposite party No.1.  They picked up the mobile  hand set from house of the complainant on 29.7.2014.   He was assured that the mobile hand set after repairs will be returned within 15 days.  He did not receive the mobile hand set within the stipulated period of 15 days.  He approached the opposite party No.1. But they did not return the mobile hand set.   

 

            On 4.9.14 he found that his mobile hand set was being used by somebody else.   He rushed to the office of opposite party No.1 and notified about the illegal activities.   The official of opposite party No.1 told the complainant that the hand set was sent to Lava Service Centre in Uttam Nagar, Delhi for repairs and the person shown in the photo (Whats App) is owner of the service centre and is testing the handset .   The mobile hand set will be returned after repairs on 08.09.14.  On 10.9.14 he again visited the office of opposite party No.1.   He met one Mr. Amit there.  He gave in writing that the mobile hand set will be returned by 15.9.14.   He did not receive mobile on 15.09.14.  He tried to contact opposite party No.1 but they stopped picking up his phone call.   The opposite party No.1 is negligent and there is deficiency in service.  They misappropriated his mobile handset.   Hence, the complaint is for directions to the opposite party No.1 to return the mobile hand set after rectification or to issue him a new mobile handset of same brand and model and adequate compensation for mental pain, agony and harassment.

-3-

            Notice of the complaint was issued to the opposite parties.  But despite service none appeared on behalf of opposite parties.  The opposite parties were proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 8.1.2015.

           

             When the complainant Sunny Bhola  was asked to lead evidence and produce documents in support of his claim,   he submitted his affidavit dated 3.3.2015 with photocopy of undertaking dated 10.9.14, insurance cover note dated 16.8.14, Invoice No. 395 dated 16.8.13.   The complainant Sh. Sunny Bhola in his affidavit has narrated the facts of the complaint and deposed that the mobile hand set was insured with opposite party No.1 for repairs, pick up and return facility.   The official of opposite party No.1 collected the mobile hand set of the complainant  on 9.5.14 but they did not return the Mobile handset.

 

            From the perusal of the documents relied upon by the complainant, it reveals that the complainant purchased mobile handset  LAVA IRIS 5040 No. 911321250035370 vide invoice dated 16.8.13 for sale consideration of                    Rs. 12,600/-.    He insured his mobile handset for repairs, pick up and return facility with opposite party No.1.   The mobile handset was picked up by official of opposite party No.1 on 9.5.14 for repairs.  On 10.9.14 Sh. Amit official of opposite party No.1 gave  in writing that the mobile handset  will be returned  on or before by 15.9.14 after repairs.   But till today the mobile handset is not returned.   He has suffered loss of the mobile handset.   He has suffered harassment and mental agony.   He is also deprived of right to use the mobile handset.

-4-

            We have heard Sh. Sunny Bhola, complainant in person and gone through the complaint, affidavit dated 3.3.15 and documents relied upon by him carefully and thoroughly.

 

            The version of the complainant has remained un-rebutted  and unchallenged.   There is no reason to disbelieve the affidavit of the complainant and documents relied upon by him.   The complainant from the affidavit  and documents relied upon by him has been able to show that he purchased the mobile handset for Rs. 12,600/- on 16.8.13.   He insured the mobile handset for repair, pick up and return facility  with opposite party No.1.  The mobile handset  developed  some problems.  He delivered mobile handset to official of opposite party No.1 on  29.07.2014 for repairs .  They did not return the mobile handset on 10.9.14.   The official of opposite party No.1 Sh. Amit gave in writing that the mobile handset will be returned to him on 15.9.14 and the same is not returned.

 

 

            Therefore, he suffered loss of Rs. 12,600/- cost of the mobile handset.   He has  also suffered  mental pain, agony and harassment.   Therefore, there is deficiency of service  on the part of opposite party No.1.   The complainant is also entitled for compensation of Rs. 25,000/- on account of  mental pain, agony and harassment suffered by him and loss of use of mobile in question as well as litigation expenses.

 

 

-5-

            In the light of above discussion and observations, the opposite party No.1 is directed to pay a sum of Rs.12,600/- (Rupees Twelve Thousand and Six Hundred) the cost of the mobile handset with interest @ 9% p.a  from the date of filing of the complaint till actual realisation of the amount with compensation of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) for mental pain, agony , harassment and loss of use of mobile handset for more than one year and litigation expenses.

 

           

Order pronounced on   : 03.02.2016

 

• Compliance of the order be made within 30 days after receipt of the order.
• Copy of order be sent to the concerned parties free of cost.
• Thereafter, file be consigned to record.

 

 

 

 

 

(PUNEET LAMBA)                               (URMILA GUPTA)                   ( R.S.  BAGRI )

  MEMBER                                            MEMBER                               PRESIDENT