Delhi

New Delhi

CC/524/2015

Anshu Bhardwaj - Complainant(s)

Versus

Nokia India sales Pvt Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

01 Jun 2016

ORDER

CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-VI (DISTT. NEW DELHI), ‘M’ BLOCK, 1^STFLOOR,

VIKAS BHAWAN, I.P.ESTATE,

NEW DELHI-110002.

 

Case No.CC/524/15                       Dated:

 

In the matter of:

MS. ANSHU BHARDWAJ

W/O SHRI VIKRANT BHARDWAJ,

R/O 7/145, SECOND FLOOR (BACK SIDE),

GEETA COLONY,

NEW DELHI-110031.

                 

         ……..COMPLAINANT

 

VERSUS

 

NOKIA INDIA SALES PVT. LTD.

(MICROSOFT PVT. LTD.)

REGD. OFFICA AT FLAT NO.1204

12^TH FLOOR, KAILASH BUILDING,

K.G. MARG, NEW DELHI-110001

THROUGH ITS DIRECTOR

 

 

ALSO AT

 

VIJAY ENCLAVE, PALAM,

NEW DELHI-110045

 

NANDA BLOCK LANE,

MAHAVIR ENCLAVE PART 1,

MAHAVIR ENCLAVE,

NEW DELHI

 

………. OPPOSITE PARTY

ORDER

 

MEMBER: MS.NIPUR CHANDNA

Complainant purchased a mobile phone make Micrsoft Lunia 540 in 9.7.2015 from OP No.2 vide Invoice No.ST/RJ/15/00632 for a sum of Rs.10,000/-.

It is alleged by the complainant that within 3 to 4 days of its purchase the aforesaid mobile started giving problem, such as, it get switched off unexpectedly, and finally on 13.07.15 the aforesaid mobile and its camera stopped working. 

It is further alleged by the complainant that her husband deposited the alleged mobile phone to OP-2 to resolve the problem, but after one week OP-2 returned the same saying that there is a small software problem in the mobile and asked the husband of the complainant to visit OP-1

It is further alleged by the complainant that her husband visited the customer care Centre of OP-1 on 20.7.2015, the service Engineer of OP-1 after examining the set informed him that it cannot be rectified and it has to be kept for almost 15 days for repair.  On not getting the satisfactory reply from customer Service Centre, complainant Lodged complaints with customer care of OP-1 vide complaint No.12696931953.

It is alleged by the complainant that OPs had sold to her defective mobile phone and are not replacing the same with new one. Hence this complaint.

Notices of the complainant were sent to the Ops through Regd. A D Post for 12.10.15.  Since none appeared on behalf of the Ops, they were ordered to be proceeded with ex-parte.

Complainant has filed her evidence by way of affidavit, wherein she has corroborated the contents of the complaint.

We have heard arguments advanced at the bar and have perused the record.

The complainant has placed on record the copy of Invoice dt.9.7.15, copy of the service job sheet dated.20.7.2015.

She has also placed on record the copies of legal notice dated 22.7.2015 along with the postal receipts, which she had sent to the OP.  The OP had  failed to comply or refute  the allegation leveled in her notice.

The number of cases courts have held that where serious allegations are made against a notices and the allegations are not refuted and the notice is simply ignored a presumptions may be drawn that the allegation made in the notice are true.  (See Kalu Ram Vs. Sita Ram 1980 RLR (Note 44) and Metro Poles Travel Vs. Sumit Kalra and Another.98(2002) DLT 573 (DB).

The present case is one where a presumption needs to be drawn in favour of the complainant

  Even otherwise there is no reason to disbelieve the facts stated in affidavit filed on record by the complainant.

From the un-rebutted testimony of the complainant as well as the documents placed on record,  we are convinced that the story put forth by the complainant is true.

The bare perusal of the service Job Sheet dated 20.7.15 makes it clear that the mobile in question becomes non functional within few days of its purchase.

We, therefore, hold OP 1 guilty of deficiency in service and direct it as under:-

1)To pay to the complainant a sum of Rs.10,000/- as a cost of the mobile phone with simple interest  @10% p.a. from date of filing complaint till today.

2)To pay to the complainant a sum of Rs.5,000/- for  mental agony trauma suffered by her including litigation cost.

The order shall be complied with within 30 days of the receipt of the copy of the order. If the said amount is not paid by the OP within a period of one month from the date of receipt of this order, the same shall be recovered by the complainant along with simple interest at the rate of 10% per annum from the date of this order till recovery of the said amount of Rs. 5,000/–. This final order be sent to server (www.confonet.nic.in ). A copy each of this order each be sent to both parties free of cost by post.

File be consigned to the record room.

Pronounced in open Forum on 01/06/2016.

 

 

(S K SARVARIA)

 PRESIDENT

 

 

                                                          (H M VYAS)                    (NIPUR CHANDNA)

                                                                MEMBER                          MEMBER