MR LAXMI NARAYAN PADHI, PRESIDENT… The factual matrix of the complaint is that, the complainant had purchased a Mobile set Make model Microsoft Lumia 535, IMEI No. 355741064437700, on dated 13/12/2014 from O.P.No-01 by paying an amount of Rs.9000/-. After purchase the complainant found that the set shows some problem like hang, slow in processing the mobile etc. So the complainant approached the OP.s to redeem the set on dt.24.12.14 and obtained the service job sheet vide no.5963 but the OP.s could not repaired the set. Hence the complainant could know that, the said set has some inherent defect which could not be repaired by the OP.s. Despite approaches the OP neither repaired the set nor refunds the price of it, for which the complainant inflicted to mental agony and sustained financial losses. A non rendering service within valid warranty period is amounts to deficiency in service under Consumer Protection Act.1986. Hence the complainant craves the leave of this hon'ble forum under compulsions. So he prays the Hon'ble Forum to direct the OP.s to pay the price of the said handset i.e. Rs.9000/- along with a sum of Rs.50,000/- as compensation along with cost of the litigation for such negligence and deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps.
2. On the other hand the OP.s neither appeared nor filed any counter in the case in spite of chances given to them for more than three months of its admission. Hence the OP.s set ex parte as contemplated in Sec.13(2)(b) of the C.P.Act.1986. The complainant heard the case at length and perused the records.
3. From the above submissions, it is found that the complainant has procured the mobile set on dt.13.12.2014 and the same became defect with in valid warranty period. As per the warranty conditions the complainant approached the OP.s for necessary repair showing the above said troubles, but the OP.s neither redeemed the set through their service center nor replaced the set with a new one. Considering the evidences, submissions by the complainant, we feel that, the mobile set purchased by the complainant has manufacturing defect and the OP.s failed to provide any service when it requires. Hence the complainant going through mental trauma with the defective set, and also inflicted financial losses and valuable times, hence the complainant compelled to file the instant case.
4. From the above discussions and perusing the submissions filed by the complainant and on examination of the alleged set, we are of the view that the alleged set has some manufacture defect and the OP.s despite receiving notice from this forum are failed to render service to the present complainant and there is nothing to disbelieve with the contentions of complainant unless filing of counter and evidences by the OP.s. Moreover it is seen that, despite complaint made by the complainant over toll free phone, the OP.2 also kept silent over the claim. Hence we feel that the action of OP is illegal, arbitrary and highhanded which amounts to deficiency in service and the complainant is entitled for relief.
The complaint is allowed against the OP.no.2 with costs.
O R D E R
i. The opposite party no.2 supra is hereby directed to pay the price of the set i.e. Rs.9000/- (Nine thousand) inter alia to pay Rs.3,000/-(Three thousand) as compensation and a sum of Rs.2000/-(Two thousand) towards the cost of litigation to the complainant.
ii. All the above directions shall be complied with in 30 days of this order, failing which, the total sum will carry 12% interest per annum till its realization.
Pronounced in the open forum on this the 16th day of June'2015.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT, DCDRF,
NABARANGPUR.
Date of Preparation:
Date of dispatch :
Date of received by
the A/A for Ops / Complainant :
Initial of the dispatcher.
