DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, NORTH-WEST
GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI
CSC-BLOCK-C, POCKET-C, SHALIMAR BAGH, DELHI-110088.
CC No: 823/2016
D.No.__________________ Date: ________________
IN THE MATTER OF:
AMIT GUPTA S/o SH. VISHNU BHAGWAN GUPTA,
R/o 98, B D ESTATE, TIMARPUR,
DELHI-110054. … COMPLAINANT
Versus
1.NORTH-WEST MARKETEERS (P) LTD.,
32, MAIN BAZAR, HUDSON LINE,
KINGSWAY CAMP, DELHI-110009.
2. M/s N D TRADERS,
(AUTHORIZED KARBONN SERVICE CENTRE),
G-6, VERDHMAN FORTUNE MALL,
LAL BAGH, AZADPUR, DELHI-110033.
3. KARBONN MOBILES,
D-170, OKHLA INDL. AREA, PH-I,
NEW DELHI-110020.… OPPOSITE PARTY(IES)
CORAM :SH. M.K. GUPTA, PRESIDENT
SH. BARIQ AHMED, MEMBER
MS. USHA KHANNA, MEMBER
Date of Institution: 23.08.2016
Date of decision:20.09.2017
SH. BARIQ AHMAD, MEMBER
ORDER
1. The complainant has filed the present complaint against the OP
CC No. 823/2016 Page 1 to 5
under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 therebyalleging that the complainant purchased a mobile handset Karbonn Mobile Quattro L50 HD vide IMEI No. 911481150015147 of Rs.7,500/- vide cash memo no. 510/59990 dated 28.03.2016 from OP-1with one year warrantee. The complainant further alleged that the complainant was shocked and surprised when in the month of July-2016 the touch screen of the mobile handset was not working properly and the complainant approached the official of OP-2 for removalof the problem on 05.07.2016 and the official of OP-2 checked the mobile handset and retained the handset against job sheet no. KJASPDL102716KR32097 and assured that the mobile handset shall be repaired within one week. Thereafter the complainant many times contacted the official of OP-2 after one week and requested them to rectify the problem of the mobile handset but all the requests of the complainant were fallen in deaf years and the complainant also contacted and requested many times to the Manager of OP-3 through telephonic calls but again the false assurance were given by OP-3 and the mobile handset is still lying faulty with OP-2. The complainant further alleged that the complainant has suffered a loss and there is deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of OPs.
CC No. 823/2016 Page 2 to 5
2. On these allegations the complainant has filed the complaint praying for refund of Rs.7,500/- being the cost of the mobilehandset alongwith interest from the date of purchaseas well as compensation of Rs.50,000/- for causing him mental pain, agony and harassment and has also prayed for grant of legal expenses of Rs.1,100/-.
3. Notices to OPs were issued through speed post for appearance on 05.10.2016 and the notices to OP-2& OP-3 were served on 30.08.2016 as per track report and notice to OP-1 was issued and as per track report “item delivery attempted door locked-intimation served”. But none for the OPs appeared on 05.10.2016 &19.12.2016 and as such OPs have been proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 19.12.2016.
4. In order to prove his case the complainant filed his affidavit in evidence and also filed written arguments. The complainant has also placed on record copy of cash memo no. 59990 dated 28.03.2016 issued by OP-1, copy of service job sheet no. KJASPDL102716KR32097 dated 05.07.2016 and copy of election voter I-Card.
5. This forum has considered the case of the complainant in the light of evidence and documents placed on record by the complainant. The case of the complainant has remained
CC No. 823/2016 Page 3 to 5
consistent and undoubted. There is nothing on record to disbelieve the case of the complainant. Moreover, it appears that even after receiving notice ofthis case from this forum, the OPs have kept mum and have not bothered to answer the case of the complainant.
6. On perusal of the record, we find that the complainant made complaint of his mobile handset to OP-2 within warranty period. Though OP-2 had tried to rectify the defect which has occurred in the mobile handset but could not be resolved. It was the duty of the OPs to rectify thedefect once for all or to replace the product. A customer/consumer is not expected to file complaints frequently in respect of new product purchased. It is expected that the new product purchased is free from all sorts of defect in the product. Accordingly, OPsare held guilty of unfair trade practice and deficiency in service.
7. Accordingly, OP-2 & OP-3 jointly or severally are directed as under:
i) To pay to the complainant an amount of Rs.7,500/- being the cost of the mobile handset on return of original bill, job sheet & accessories.
ii) To pay to the complainant an amount of Rs.3,500/- as compensation towards mental agony and harassment caused to the complainant which includes cost of litigation.
CC No. 823/2016 Page 4 to 5
8. The above amount shall be paid by the OP-2 & OP-3 jointly or severally to the complainant within 30 days from the date of receiving of this order failing which OP-2 & OP-3 shall be liable to pay interest on the entire awarded amount @ 10% perannum from the date of receiving of this order till the date of payment. If OP-2 & OP-3 fail to comply the order within 30 days from the date of receiving of this order, thecomplainant may approach this Forum u/s 25 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
9. Let a copy of this order be sent to each party free of csost as per regulation 21 of the Consumer Protection Regulations, 2005. Thereafter file be consigned to record room.
Announced on this 20thSeptember, 2017.
BARIQ AHMED USHA KHANNA M.K. GUPTA
(MEMBER) (MEMBER) (PRESIDENT)
CC No. 823/2016 Page 5 to 5