Date of Filing : 12.11.2013
Date of Order : 13.11.2017
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (SOUTH)
2nd Floor, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C. Nagar, Park Town, Chennai-3
PRESENT: THIRU. M.MONY, B.Sc., L.L.B. M.L., : PRESIDENT
TMT. K.AMALA, M.A. L.L.B., : MEMBER I
DR. T.PAUL RAJASEKARAN, M.A ,D.Min.PGDHRDI, AIII,BCS : MEMBER II
C.C.NO.29/2014
MONDAY THIS 13TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2017
Andrew Pandian,
S/o. N.R.T.Pandian,
No.20, Sarathy Street,
Amaravathy Nagar,
Jalladianpet, Pallikaranai,
Chennai 600 100. .. Complainant
..Vs..
1. M/s. Poorvika Mobiles Pvt. Ltd.,
Rep. by its Managing Director,
30, Arcot Road, Kodambakkam,
Chennai 600 024.
2. The Manager,
Ms/. Poorvika Mobiles Pvt. Ltd.,
Medavakkam Main Road,
Medavakkam,
Chennai 600 100. .. Opposite parties.
Counsel for Complainant : M/s. K. Kannan & others
Counsel for opposite parties : M/s. B.Mahendran & another
ORDER
THIRU. M. MONY, PRESIDENT
This complaint has been filed by the complainant against the opposite parties under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 seeking direction to pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- as compensation for mental agony and to pay cost of the complaint.
- The averment of the complaint in brief are as follows:
The complainant submit that on 25.8.2013 he purchased a Micromax X351 mobile phone from the 2nd opposite party for a sum of Rs.2,500/- after reaching his house when checked the mobile phone he found pasted price slip showing MRP Rs.1950/-. The complainant also verified the price of the Micromax mobile phone in on line which shows the MRP is Rs.1750/-. Thereafter the complainant contacted the Manager of the 2nd opposite party to solve the issue. But the 2nd opposite party insulted and humiliated by using vulgar words. On 27.8.2013 the complainant sent a letter to the 2nd opposite party for which there is no response. On 3.10.2013 legal notice was issued to the opposite parties. But the opposite parties has not complied the request made in the legal notice. As such the act of the opposite parties amounts to deficiency in service which caused mental agony and hardship to the complainant. Hence this complaint is filed.
2. The brief averments in the Written Version of the opposite parties is as follows:
The opposite parties deny each and every allegations except those that are specifically admitted herein. The opposite parties submit that the opposite parties introduced a scheme of offer (combo offer) either to purchase the said product alone worth about Rs.1950/- + combo offer of Rs.234/- totaling Rs.2184/-. Further the complainant combo offer includes Scratch Card, Pouch, 8 GB Memory Card which is worth of Rs.600/-. The complainant after knowing the aforesaid facts, and having understood about the said offer chosen to buy the product with combo offer and paid a sum of Rs.2184/- with value added tax of Rs.316/- totally paying a sum of Rs.2500/ for the product of Mobile phone with extra accessories and Vat. Moreover, admittedly there are no defects in the afore said mobile product and the complainant had purchased the said product after knowing the price of the product and hence there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party and the complaint is liable to be dismissed.
3. In order to prove the averments of the complaint, the complainant has filed proof affidavit as his evidence and documents Ex.A1 to Ex.A5 marked. Proof affidavit of opposite parties not filed and no documents marked on the side of the opposite parties.
4. The points for the consideration is:
Whether the complainant is entitled to a sum of Rs.50,000/- towards compensation for mental agony with cost as prayed for?
5. ON POINT :
Heard complainant counsel. Perused the records. The opposite parties has not filed proof affidavit and has not turned up to advance any oral arguments and not filed written arguments. The complainant pleaded in the complaint and contended that on 25.8.2013 he purchased a Micromax X351 mobile phone from the 2nd opposite party as per invoice Ex.A1 for a sum of Rs.2,500/- after reaching his house when checked the mobile phone he found pasted price slip showing MRP Rs.1950/- as per Ex.A2. The complainant also verified the price of the Micromax mobile phone in on line which shows the MRP is Rs.1750/- as per Ex.A3. Thereafter the complainant contacted the Manager of the 2nd opposite party to solve the issue. But the 2nd opposite party insulted and humiliated by using vulgar words. On 27.8.2013 the complainant sent a letter to the 2nd opposite party Ex.A4 for which there is no response. On 3.10.2013 Ex.A5 legal notice was issued to the opposite parties. But the opposite parties has not complied the request made in the legal notice. Hence the complainant was constrained to file this compliant claiming compensation.
6. The opposite party after filing written version has not come forward to file any proof affidavit or document to prove the contents in the written version. As per the written version the opposite parties introduced a scheme of offer (combo offer) either to purchase the said product alone worth about Rs.1950/- + combo offer of Rs.234/- totaling Rs.2184/-. Further the complainant contended that the combo offer includes Scratch Card, Pouch, 8 GB Memory Card worth of Rs.600/-. The complainant after knowing the aforesaid facts, and having understood about the said offer chosen to purhcase the product with combo offer and paid a sum of Rs.2184/- with value added tax of Rs.316/- totally paid sum of Rs.2500/ for the product of Mobile phone with extra accessories and Vat. But the complainant has not produced any document to prove the said combo offer which includes Scratch card, pouch, 8 GB memory card etc. On the other hand as per Ex.A1 to Ex.A3 it is very clear that the complainant purchased the Micromax mobile phone for a sum of Rs.2500/- including vat Rs.316/- for cost price of Rs.1950/-. The opposite parties has not explained such exorbitant amount. Therefore the opposite parties committed deficiency in service. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case this forum is of the considered view that the opposite parties 1 and 2 are jointly and severally liable to pay a sum of Rs.1950/- with cost of Rs.2,000/- to the complainant and the point is answered accordingly.
In the result the complaint is allowed in part. The opposite parties 1 and 2 are jointly and severally liable to pay a sum of Rs.1950/- (Rupees One thousand nine hundred and fifty only) with cost of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees two thousand only) to the complainant.
The aboveamounts shall be payable within six weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order, failing which, the said amounts shall carry interest at the rate of 9% p.a to till the date of payment.
Dictated by the President to the Assistant, taken down, transcribed and computerized by her, corrected by the President and pronounced by us in the open Forum on this the 13th day of November 2017.
MEMBER-I MEMBER-II PRESIDENT.
Complainant’s side documents:
Ex.A1- 25.8.2013 - Copy of bill.
Ex.A2- 25.8.2013 - Copy of MRP price list on box.
Ex.A3- 25.8.2013 - Copy of online bill.
Ex.A4- 27.8.2013 - Copy of letter sent by the complainant.
Ex.A5- 3.10.2013 - Copy of legal notice.
Opposite parties’ side document: - ..Nil..
MEMBER-I MEMBER-II PRESIDENT.
