Coram:    Mohd. Anwar Alam, President

                  Vikram Kumar Dabas, Member

                  Manju Bala Sharma, Member

                                                                     ORDER                                    Dated: 04-04  -2017

Mohd. Anwar Alam, President

1. The complainant filed this complaint on 12-12-2016 and alleged that on 20.12.2014   he has purchased a Nikon DSLR camera bearing model no. D-750 along with kit lens 24-120 mm, bearing serial no. 8801896 through its authorized retailer M/s  Varun Photo Store for a sum of Rs. 1,53,000/- with a warranty period of two years from the date of purchase.  Complainant further alleged that the said camera started malfunctioning and was unable to work properly even on the very first use by him. In the month of February 2015, OP uploaded a message regarding on its factum of defect/ technical fault in certain models of  cameras bearing certain serial numbers and called them back for the rectification of the defect / technical fault. Accordingly he approached OP  and appraised the  condition of his Camera.  OP returned  camera to the complainant on 11. 02. 2015 with the assurance that the same will work properly and smoothly in future  but the same was not working properly and smoothly as the pictures generated by the said camera were having the spot of dusts and also generating the poor quality of picture. Accordingly he sent  e-mails  dated 23. 05. 2015, 25. 05. 2015, 17. 08. 2015, 18. 08. 2015 to the OP for the rectification of  defects in the said camera. On 31.08.2015 he again deposited  the camera to Service Center and OP handed over the camera  to him with the remark in the service detail “tested the camera, it is working fine”.   Complainant got checked the camera in the service center itself in the presence of the officials of service center of OP but the defect was still existed and he again deposited the camera on   07. 09. 2015. On 16.09.2015 OP has handed over the camera to him  with the remarks in  service detail “replaced the shutter and front body unit, Camera is working fine".  On 18.09.2015 he again deposited the camera for rectification and on 25.09.2015  OP’s service centre officials handed over the camera with service details remarked as “image sensor cleaning done, camera working fine”. The defects were existed till date and thereafter the complainant being aggrieved by the acts of OP sent a legal notice dated 01.10.2015 and OP gave reply  to the legal notice which was based on false and fabricated facts. Hence complainant prayed to direct OP to release the claim amount of Rs. 1,53,000/- along with upto date interest and to pass an order of compensation of Rs. 3,50,000/- for the mental agony and pain and Rs. 25,000/- as litigation cost.
2. In reply, OP  admitted that the camera bearing model no. D-750 purchased by the complainant is of exceptional quality and exceeds industry standards in terms of exceptional manufacturing and picture quality and delivering of performance. OP also admitted that it had published a service advisory regarding “flair issue” in certain models of camera series which were called for rectification free of charge and  on 31.08.2015 he approached OP in Delhi and its  service center  on 07.09.2015 wherein he was extended with all possible assistance and the camera was again booked against service order bearing no. SO/15-16/010384 for the issue of repeated dust issue/ rest need to check.” On 15.09.2015 camera was returned to the complainant with the remarks on service invoice “Replaced the Shutter and Front body Unit. Camera is working fine now.”  Complainant once again submitted the said camera on 18.09.2015 and on 22.09.2015 the same was returned to complainant after cleaning with remarks on the service invoice “Image Sensor Cleaning Done, camera working fine.”  OP denied rest of the allegations and prayed to dismiss the complaint with costs.
3. The complainant has filed rejoinder to the written statement and denied the objections made by OP and supported his complaint.
4. In support of his complaint complainant filed his own affidavit along with documents i.e.  affidavit ( Ex. CW-1/1) , copy of original bill and warranty card   (Ex. CW1/2 and Ex. CW-1/3),   job card and returning receipts  (Ex. CW-1/4) (colly), copy of various emails  (Ex. CW-1/A) (colly)   and  certificate U/s 65B of evidence act is Ex. CW-1/5.
5.  In support of reply OP filed affidavit of Mr. Jogi Francis ,  ( General- Manager).
6. Both the parties filed their written arguments.
7. We have heard the arguments and considered the evidence led by the parties and their written and oral arguments.  In this case points to be considered are as under:-

1. Whether complainant is a consumer?
2. Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the OP?
3. Relief.

8. Mere perusal of the bill filed by the complainant (Ex. CW1/2) clarify that on 20.12.2014 complainant purchased Nikon B750 Camera for Rs. 1,53,000/- hence complainant is a consumer.

9. It is evident from the reply of the OP that camera purchased by the complainant is of high quality and admittedly this camera was creating problem to the complainant regarding the quality of the picture which was rectified by the OP but the problem  still persists. It is pertinent to mention herein that soon after the purchase of the camera complainant was complaining the malfunctioning of the camera as it was unable to work properly and the same was reported to the service center of OP. Despite necessary repairs and service provided by the service center of OP the malfunctioning and problems created by the camera still persisted which is suffice to prove the manufacturing defect in the camera purchased by the complainant.
10. Hence looking to the facts and circumstances of the present case we are of the considered opinion that the purchased amount of the camera should be refunded to the complainant  and we direct OP1 as under:

1. To refund the purchase amount of the camera (Rs. 1,53,000/-) to the complainant.
2. To pay Rs. 5,000/- as compensation for the  pain and harassment suffered by him.

11. The complainant shall handover the camera to the OP1  after receiving payment of the above mentioned amounts.
12.  Copy of the order made available to the parties free of cost as per law.

     File  be consigned to record room.

Announced on………