1. The complainant filed a petition praying to pass orders directing the O.Ps to refund the cost of the Mobile handset along with 18% interest and to pay Rs. 50,000/- towards compensation and Rs. 5,000/- towards cost of litigation.
2. The complainant in the petition submitted that he purchased a Lava Mobile handset bearing Model No. Iris 405+ IMEI No.911305953400737 vide Delivery Challan No. 19 dated 20.04.2014 Just Six months of its purchase, the above Mobile set showed several defects. Despite several approaches which has not been rectified by the Opposite Parties. Due to unfair trade practice/deficiency in service by the Opposite Parties the complainant suffered mentally, physically and financially.
3. Despite notice the Opposite Parties neither appeared nor flied their r written version as such the Opposite Parties are ex-parte vide our order dated 22.7.2015..
4. We come across a decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Vidya Dhar-versus-Munkif Rao and another reported in 1992(2) Civil Court Cases at page-91 held that “ if a party did not adduce any evidence in rebuttal, then adverse inference should drawn against the party for not rebutting the evidence”.
5. Therefore, the un-rebutted arguments left no corner to disbelieve the complaint. Taking consideration the undisputed documented evidence and pleadings, we are inclined to pass order in favour of the complainant, directing the manufacturer the OP No.3 to refund the cost of the mobile as Rs. 6,300/- (Rupees Six thousand three hundred only) and pay RS.5,000/- only to the complainant towards compensation and Rs. 2,000/- (Rupees Tow thousand only) towards litigation expenses to the complainant within 30 days on receipt of copy of this order in default, the Opposite Party No-3 is liable to pay Rs. 50/- per day till its realization. Copy of the order be communicate to the parties free of cost.
Copy of the order be sent to the parties free of cost.
Pronounced in open Court on 30th June, 2015.
