BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-I, U.T. CHANDIGARH

========

Sanjeev Wadhwa son of late Sh.Ravi Wadhwa, r/o H.No.2310, Sector 23-B, Chandigarh.

…..Complainant

                                      V E R S U S

1.       Nokia through its Managing Director, Opposite Plaza Solitare, Sector 14, Old Delhi Road, Gurgaon, 122 001.

2.       Balaji Telecom Opposite Nehru Park, Circular Road, Abohar.

3.       Himalaya Photo Store, SCO No.1032-33, Sector 22-B, Chandigarh.

                                                ……Opposite Parties

CORAM:     SH.P.D.GOEL                                    PRESIDENT

                   SH.RAJINDER SINGH GILL               MEMBER

                   DR.(MRS) MADANJIT KAUR SAHOTA  MEMBER

Argued by:    Sh.Ankush Kalia, Advocate for the complainant.

                        OPs – Exparte.

PER P.D.GOEL,PRESIDENT

1.                Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the complainant purchased one mobile of Nokia N-8 bearing IMEI S.NO.357398048180026 from OP No.3 on 02.07.2011 vide bill No.4431 for Rs.20,600/-with warranty of one year. As per the complainant, on 19.8.2011, the mobile was not working, so he made a complaint to OP No.2, who after examining the mobile told that “PROBLEM OF POWER PHONE RESTART/REBOOTS AND CAMERA NOT IN FUNCTIONALITY” and issued a job card dated 20.8.2011. It has been stated that the said mobile has not been returned to the complainant till date. The complainant visited the office of OP many times, but all in vain. The complainant also served a legal notice dated 1.9.2011 to the OPs but the OP No.1 refused to accept the legal notice and only OP No.2 replied to the legal notice, qua which, it has been stated that “On physical inspection and entry level screening of the handset, it was found that the handset had damaged by liquid/physical damage/tempered. Thus, the mobile set was out of warranty and could not be repaired under warranty. Despite many requests, the OPs have neither replaced the defective mobile set nor refunded the amount to him. Hence, this complaint.

2.                OP No.3  did not appear despite due service as such it was proceeded against exparte vide order dated 09.11.2011. OPs No.1 & 2 also did not appear despite due service as such they were proceeded against exparte vide order dated 25.11.2011.

3.                The complainant led evidence in support of his contentions.

4.                We have heard the learned Counsel for the complainant and have also perused the record.

5.                The averments made in the complaint, as reproduced above in para No.1 of the order, stands corroborated from the affidavit of the complainant, as well as the Annexures (Page No.9 to 16).  Page No.9 is the copy of the bill  No.4431 dated 02.07.2011. From this document, it is proved that the Nokia Mobile N-8 was purchased by the complainant for a sum of Rs.20,600/- from OP No.3.  Page No.10 is the copy of the Service Job Sheet dated 20.8.2011, wherein, it has been mentioned that the mobile set in question is having the problem of power restart/reboots and camera not functional.  Page No. 11-13 is the copy of the legal notice dated 1.9.2011 sent to the OPs through Counsel. Page No.14 is the copies of postal receipts. Page No.15 is the envelope sent by the complainant through Regd. AD to OP No.1 and the stamp on the envelope proves that the OP No.1 refused to accept it. Page No.16 is the copy of reply to the legal notice sent by OP No.2 dated 16.9.2011 to the complainant.

6.                Otherwise also, the allegations made in the complaint have gone un-rebutted and un-controverted as nobody appeared on behalf of the OPs to contest the case. Non-replacing of the defective mobile set or refund of the amount, despite repeated requests of the complainant amounts to deficiency in service on the part of the OPs. 

7.                As a result of the above discussion, the complaint is exparte allowed and the OPs are directed to replace the mobile set in question of the complainant with same make and model, failing which, to refund Rs.20,600/- being the price of the mobile set to the complainant along with interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of filing of the complaint till its realization. The OPs are also directed to pay Rs.5,000/- to the complainant as compensation for mental agony and harassment and costs of litigation. This order be complied with by the OPs within one month from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order.

8.                Certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge. The file be consigned.