Orissa

Rayagada

CC/25/2017

Sri M. Tilak Choudhurys - Complainant(s)

Versus

Om Collection - Opp.Party(s)

Sri V.R.M. Patnaik

14 Nov 2017

ORDER

DISTRICT   CONSUMER  DISPUTES REDRESSAL    FORUM, RAYAGADA,

STATE:  ODISHA.

C.C. Case  No. 25 / 2017.                                              Date.      14.11.  2017

P R E S E N T .

Dr. Aswini Kumar  Mohapatra,                       President.

Sri  Gadadhara Sahu,                                                                      Member.

Smt. Padmalaya  Mishra,                                                              Member

 

Sri   N.Tilak  Choudhury,  S/O: Late M.Bhaskar Rao, Kapu Street, Po/Dist:Rayagada  (Odisha).     Cell  No.8984117713                                                    …. Complainant.

Versus.

1.The  Manager, M/S. Om collections, Po/Dist:Rayagada  (Odisha).                 

2.The Manager, Videocon planet mobiles Pvt. Ltd., plot No. 254, lind floor, Udyog Vihar, phase-IV, gurgaon-122015, Hariyana (India).                 … Opposite parties.

For the Complainant:-Sri  V.R.M.Patnaik, Advocate, Rayagada(Odisha).

For the O.Ps :- Set exparte.

•  

JUDGMENT

                The  present dispute arises out of the complaint petition filed by the above named complainant alleging deficiency in service  against  afore mentioned O.Ps for non refund of mobile price.   The brief facts of the case  has summarised here under.

 

            That the complainant  has purchased a mobile Videocon-255 dash white, vide IMEI No. 911460300362880 for  Rs. 6,500/-  from the O.P. No.1 on Dt.  26.4.2016.  The O.P. No.1 has given  bill  for mobile vide bill No. 2016 /2017  dt. 26.4.2016 with  one year warranty. The complainant  faced  so many  problems  in the above set i.e.  No ring tone  when  any calls him. The complainant could not hear if any  body  calls him.  The complainant had approached the authorized service  centre   on dt. 20.9.2016   and told all the problems faced by  him.  The  service  centre  could not rectified  the  defects   pointed by the complainant and returned the mobile set  and informed him  that the above set  is having  manufacturing  defects   and it cold not be rectified. Hence this case. The complainant prays the forum  direct the O.Ps  to refund  mobile  set  price and such other relief  as the hon’ble deems fit and proper  for the best  interest of  justice.

The  O.Ps.     received  notice from the  forum as  revealed  from the  postal receipt, but neither appeared nor choose to file written version.  The statutory period for filing of written version  was over.  Hence the O.Ps.  were set exparte.  So the case was posted for  hearing  to close the case within the time frame as per  the C.P. Act.

The  O.Ps  were     received  notice from the  forum as  revealed  from the  postal receipt, but neither appeared nor choose to file written version.  The statutory period for filing of written version  was over.  Hence the O.Ps  were set exparte.  So the case was posted for  hearing  to close the case within the time frame as per  the C.P. Act.

                During the exparte  hearing the complainant examined himself and proved the payment  of the  money  to the O.Ps. The complainant has also produced  the service job sheet including  warranty card relating to the above case. The complainant also argued  due to non repair of the above set the complainant suffered a lot of financial trouble  and mental agony. The complainant prays the forum as the  O.Ps  not heard any  grievance of the complainant till date   so the  O.Ps  be  directed to refund  purchase price   along with  bank interest.

In  the absence  of any  denial  by  way  of  written  version  from the side  of the O.Ps. it is  presumed that the allegations  levelled against   the  O.Ps. deemed  to have  been  proved.    The  complainant   had  paid  the  amount   for the good service  as per  warranty  card  which  intended      with the O.P and the  said payment is  made for the consideration for the said service.  When the O.Ps  have failed to  give such service  as per warranty card  for   which  the O.Ps  have   received   the  amount.   It is  deemed that the  O.Ps   were   callous to the allegations  and it amounts  to deficiency  of service.

In the  present case  the O.Ps . are jointly and several liable.

Hence to meet  the  ends  of  justice,  the following   order is  passed.

ORDER.

                In the result with these  observations, findings, discussion the complaint petition is allowed  in part on exparte against the O.Ps.

               

                The O.P No.2  is  ordered to take back their product  and  refund price of the Video con mobile  set   a sum of Rs. 6,500/- to the complainant.  The O.P No.2 is further ordered to pay Rs.1,000.00  towards litigation  expenses.

 

                The O.P.No.1   is  directed to  refer the matter  to the  O.P.No.2   for  early  compliance  of the  above  order.

                The O.Ps are  ordered to comply the above direction within one month from the date of  receipt of this order,. Serve the copies of the order to the parties.

 

Dictated and corrected by me

Pronounced  on  this   14th.                day of        November                  , 2017.

 

                                                MEMBER.                                                        PRESIDENT.