Punjab

Rupnagar

RBT/CC/18/352

Satish Tiwari - Complainant(s)

Versus

Odigi Services Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

Complainant in person

24 Nov 2022

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION CAMP COURT AT LUDHIANA

Received by way of transfer Consumer Complaint No.352 of 2018

                                               Date of institution:29.05.2018

                                               Date of Decision:24.11.2022

 

Satish Tiwari son of Mohan Lal Tiwari, resident of # 2822- A, CRP Colony, Phase I, Urban Estate Dugri, Ludhiana

…….Complainant

Versus

 

1. Odigi Services Limited Laaly & #39-S, Arcade #B-II 1086/1, Shop No.19, 1^st Floor #41, Gole Market Near Levi Showroom Gole Market Ludhiana, through its Managing Director/Proprietor/Partner/Authorized Signatory  
2. Xiomi Technology, India Private Limited, #8^th Floor, Tower-I, Umiya Business Ray, Marathahalli-Sarjapur, Outer Ring Road, Banglore, Karnatka, India, Pin Code 560103 through its Managing Director/Proprietor/Authorized Signatory.   

…..Opposite Parties

 QUORUM:   

   HON’BLE MR. RANJIT SINGH, PRESIDENT.

                   HON’BLE MRS. RANVIR KAUR, MEMBER

 

PRESENT:

      

Sh. Kuldeep Bhatial, Adv. for complainant

OP No.1 exparte

Sh. Kanwarnain Singh Grewal, Adv. for OP2

              
 

ORDER

RANJIT SINGH, PRESIDENT

 

1. The present order of ours will dispose of the above complaint filed under Consumer Protection Act, by the complainant against the Opposite Parties on the ground that the complainant had purchased one mobile set make Redmi from OP2 through shipmet ticket dated 24.9.2017 after paying a sum of Rs.9499/- vide online payment. There is relationship of consumer and service provider between the complainant and OP. The said mobile set was sold to the complainant with the expressed guarantee that the same will be a genuine and snag/defect free product. Just a lapse of six month, the power of the mobile gone off and mobile stop working and screen was gone to dark black. Then the complainant immediately approached the OP1 at their service centre, where the complainant told about the defect of the mobile to the representative of service centre and on this after inspected the said mobile, the representative requested him for depositing the said mobile with service centre for repair purpose, and the same was deposited by the complainant after issuing of service slip dated 3.3.2018 and same day in evening time the representative of the said centre approached at mobile number of the complainant and told him that “your phone has been repaired some software problem was to be arise and now technical errors removes from your mobile and now you can pick your mobile from our service centre. It is further stated that after lapse of one month, again same problem started and therefore complainant visited the service centre where after inspected the representative and told him that previously your mobile has repaired from outside, so therefore we are unable to repair the same, if you want to do than the necessary charge would be applicable and on this the complainant said that to representative of the said centre that the complainant did not got service from outside because the service centre being a nearby his resident and also service centre of Redmi although no repair got effected by the complainant from otherside being a said mobile was in guarantee/warranty period. So, it is the duty of the OP to provide the genuine products and if any fault arises within a guarantee/warranty period the same to be repaired free of cost. Now the OP1 is pretext of repair charges amounting to Rs.5662.82/-. The complainant tired to make OP to understand that the mobile well within the guarantee period, but they did not pay any heed to the request of the complainant. Hence, this complaint. Vide this instant complaint, the complainant has sought the following relief:-
   1. To replace the mobile set of amounting to Rs.9499/- along with interest @ 14% per annum on account of sale price.
   2. To pay Rs.5000/- as compensation
   3. Any other relief which this Hon’ble Commission, deemed fit that may also kindly be granted in favour of the complainant.   
2. Upon notice,  the OP1 has choosen to remain exparte vide order dated 21.08.2018.
3. Upon notice, the OP2 has filed written reply stating therein that there is no deficiency in service on the part of answering OP. The OP2 authorized service centre duly received the complainant product , examined if for defects an informed him that since unauthorized repair has been carried out in the product, the product is  therefore out of warranty and the complainant would be required to pay costs for repairing the damage caused to the product. Thus,  alleging no deficiency in service on the part of OP2 and prayed for dismissal the present complaint.           
4. In support of the complaint, the complainant has tendered various documents. On the other hand, the OP2 has also tendered documents in support of their evidence.
5. We have heard the learned counsel for the complainant and have gone through the record of the file, carefully.
6. In this complaint, the main issue is that whether the complainant is entitled to the claim or not?.

It is important to mention here that the service centre after inspection of the mobile set in question it was found that the mobile set in question was subjected to unauthorized repair. The technicians of the authorized service centre duly informed that since the product has been subjected to unauthorized repair from a local repair shop, the product is now out of warranty and the complainant would be required to pay costs to repair the defect in the product, this thing is cleared from annexure D placed on record by the OP2. It is important to mention here that the parties are bound to comply with the terms and condition strictly. In this complaint, the complainant is violated the terms and condition of the product, therefore, the complainant is not entitled to any relief/claim.

7. In view of our above discussion, we dismiss the present complaint with no order as to cost. Free certified copies of this order be sent to the parties, as per rules. The file be sent back to the District Consumer Commission, Ludhiana, for consigning the same to the Record Room.
8.  

November 24, 2022

(Ranjit Singh)

•  

                                   

 

(Ranvir Kaur)

•