BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES
REDRESSAL COMMISSION, JALANDHAR.
Complaint No.177 of 2019
Date of Instt. 20.05.2019 Date of Decision: 09.03.2021
Sukhdev Singh aged 32 years son of Sh. Hazara Singh resident of House no.22/1, Near Khurla Kingra, Doordarshan Enclave, Model Town, Jalandhar.
..........Complainant
Versus
1. Nokia India Pvt. Ltd., 2nd Floor, Commercial Plaza, Radisson Hotel, NH-8, Mahilpur, New Delhi through its General Manager.
2. Nokia India Pvt. Ltd., Corporate Office at 7th Floor, Building 9A, DLF Cyber City, DLF Phase-III, Gurgaon-122002 Haryana through its General Manager/Authorized Representative.
3. Nokia Mobile Care, through Authorized Service Centre Fateh Enterprises, Shop no.4, 8/1 , Green Park, Opp. All India Radio Station, Near Lajwanti Hospital, Jalandhar through its manager/prop.
4. Chadha Mobile House Pvt. Ltd. Phagwara Gate, Bhagat Singh Chowk, Jalandhar through its Managing Director Pawan Chadha.
5. Pawan Chadha Managing Director Chadha Mobile House Pvt. Ltd. Phagwara Gate, Bhagat Singh Chowk, Jalandhar.
6. Vicky Chadha Director Chadha Mobile House Pvt. Ltd. Phagwara Gate, Bhagat Singh Chowk, Jalandhar.
….….. Opposite Parties
Complaint Under the Consumer Protection Act.
Before: Sh. Kuljit Singh (President)
Smt. Jyotsna (Member)
Present: Sh. Vinay Sharma, Adv. Counsel for the Complainant.
OPs No.1 to 6 exparte.
Order
Kuljit Singh (President)
1. The instant complaint has been filed by the complainant, wherein alleged that in the month of January 2019 the complainant purchased a mobile handset make Nokia-6.1 Plus 4/64 GM HSN/SAC 8517 bearing IMEI No.353385096371354 from OP No.4 to 6, vide bill/Invoice No.T-41148 dated 20.01.2019 for a sum of Rs.14,700/-. At the time of purchasing the above said mobile the complainant was assured by the OPs No.4 to 6 that the above said handset is free from any defect and for anything else there is a warranty of one year for the above said mobile it was also assured to the complainant that in case of any technical or mechanical problem or manufacturing defect in the mobile set, due service will be provided to the complainant through their authorized service centre thus on the assurance of the OPs No.4 to 6, the complainant purchased the above said handset believing the words of OPs No.4 to 6 as true. The OPs No.1 and 2 are dealing in Nokia for its sale in India through their authorized dealers i.e. OPs No.4 to 6 at Jalandhar and OP No.3 is authorized service centre of OPs No.1 and 2. That initially the complainant found that there is some defect of receiving the network issue call waiting in the handset as well as touch screen of the handset and battery problem in the month of February 2019 and when the complainant reported the matter to the OP No.3 it was assured to him that it is not a manufacturing defect rather the same is due to high congestion and heavy load on the network and will be cured within few days. Therefore, as per the assurances the complainant continue to use his above handset bearing with the above said problem in the handset. That thereafter in the month of March 2019 i.e within the warranty period, the handset of the complainant arose same problem and touch screen of the handset of the mobile phone was not working properly and thereafter the battery was created problem and call waiting option was not working and network was not working properly then the complainant was locked a complaint to the OP No.3 on 06.03.2019 who received the handset of the complainant and gave his visiting card and receiving note on the backside of said visiting card dated 06.03.2019 at serial No.225. The complainant also requested the OP to give the job sheet but they refused to give the same and told the complainant that their company cannot give job sheet to any customer. That thereafter the complainant contacted the OP regarding his mobile handset but he OPs refused to repair the said defect and told the complainant that the said problem cannot be repaired and the said handset should be taken by him as such. The complainant has also served a legal notice dated 18.04.2019, but all in vain and as such necessity arose to file the present complaint with the prayer that the complaint of the complainant may be accepted and OPs be directed to refund the sum of Rs.14,700/- being price/cost of the handset and further OPs be directed to pay Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation and Rs.11,000/- as litigation expenses.
2. Notice of the complaint was given to the OPs, but despite service all the OPs miserably failed to appear and ultimately, all the OPs were proceeded against exparte.
3. In order to prove his exparte version, the counsel for the complainant produced on the file his evidence at the time of filing the complaint.
4. We have heard the argument from learned counsel for the complainant and also gone through the case file as well as written arguments submitted by learned counsel for the complainant, very minutely.
5. It is established on the file that the allegations made in the complaint has been already conveyed to the OP by giving a legal notice dated 18.04.2019 through registered post and copy of the postal receipts are Ex.C-5 to Ex.C-10, it is presume that the legal notice was served to the OPs, but despite becoming aware about the manufacturing defect in the mobile phone, all the OPs did not bother and they never call upon the complainant to get rectify his mobile and thereafter, the complainant filed the instant complaint and notice of this complaint was also served upon all the OPs, but despite service again OPs did not bother to appear in the Commission and they were proceeded against exparte and ultimately, the allegations of the complainant are remained un-rebutted and un-challenged because there is no rebuttal evidence came on the file qua the allegations of complainant.
6. In order to give strength to the allegations as made in the complaint, the counsel for the complainant submitted that the mobile in question is within warranty period when first time a defect was occurred qua receiving the network issue call waiting in the handset as well as touch screen of the handset and battery problem. No doubt, the complainant has brought on the file one Visiting Card in which at the backside of this card remarks is given “Sr. No.225, full set receive” and then gave receiving alongwith date, from this visiting card one thing is clear that the complainant deposited his handset to the service centre and the service centre instead of issuing any job sheet simply gave remarks on the back side of the visiting card, which shows that some defect was occurred in the mobile phone, but in order to controvert the allegation of the complainant that there is repeatedly defect has been occurred, the OP has not appeared in the witness box. So, in the absence of any evidence on the part of the OPs, we have no option except to accept the un-rebutted evidence of the complainant i.e. there is a manufacturing defect in the mobile phone, so complainant is entitled for the refund of the price of the mobile set along with compensation, interest and litigation expenses.
7. In view of the above detailed discussion, the complaint of the complainant is exparte partly accepted and all the OPs are directed to refund the price of the mobile phone i.e. Rs.14,700/- with interest @ 5% per annum from the date of purchase i.e. 20.01.2019, till realization and further, OPs are directed to pay compensation and litigation expenses to the complainant, to the tune of Rs.3000/- for causing mental tension and harassment. It is further ordered that the complainant will return the old mobile to the OPs at the time of receiving the award amount. All the opposite parties jointly and severally liable to comply with the above mentioned order of this Commission. The entire compliance be made within 45 days from the date of receipt of the copy of order. This complaint could not be decided within stipulated time frame due to rush of work.
8. Copies of the order be supplied to the parties free of cost, as per Rules. File be indexed and consigned to the record room after its due compliance.
ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COMMISSION:
9th Day of March 2021
(Kuljit Singh)
President
(Jyotsna)
Member
