Orissa

Rayagada

CC/39/2016

Sri Satyajit Subudhi - Complainant(s)

Versus

Propreitor VRP Telematics Pvt., - Opp.Party(s)

Self

07 Jan 2017

ORDER

            DISTRICT   CONSUMER  DISPUTES REDRESSAL    FORUM, RAYAGADA

                                                           C.C. Case  No.39/ 2016.

P R E S E N T .

Sri Gadadhara Sahu, B.Sc.                                   Member

Smt.Padmalaya Mishra,LL.B                                  Member

            Sri Satyajit Subudhi,aged abouit 29 years, Son of late Umakant Subudhi, Resident of         Main Road, Rayagada, Po/Ps/Dist. Rayagada,                                                                

                                                                                                            ………Complainant

Vrs.

1.  Proprietor, VRP Telematics Private Limited, BIJ,Khasra No.631 Phirni Sadak, Village Bijwasan, Near CISF Camp,Delhi,110061.
2. The Service Manager,Snapdeal,203,Second Lessor Ecological Village, Old Nagardas Road, East Andheri, Mumbai.
3. The Service Centre, Accel Frontline Limited,23,2^nd Floor, Nandanvan Society, B/H Railway Station, Opp. Shilalekh Duplex, Near Mamta Hotel, Alkapuri,Bartoda,390005,Gujarat.
4. The Care Manager,InFocus Technogogies Pvt. Ltd.,230B,1^st Floor, AJC Bose Road,Minto Park,Kolkata,West Bengal,700020.

                                                                                                    ……...Opp.Parties

Counsel for the parties:

For the complainant: Sri R.K.Senapati,Advocate,Rayagada.

For the O.Ps: Exparte

 

                                                            JUDGMENT

                        The facts of the complaint  in brief is that,  the complainant has purchased  one  InFocus M330  mobile set  from O.p. No.1with a  consideration of Rs.8,999/- on 07.09.2015 vide Retail Invoice cum Cash bill No.S05787/15-16/135728     but   after   its purchase the  mobile set  was  found defective  and     for which  the complainant informed to the O.p. No. 1    but the Ops  failed to rectify the defects   and hence finding no other option  the complainant  approach this forum and prayed to direct the O.ps  to replace the defective and requested him to replace the mobile set with a new one  but the Op 1 requested to approach the service entre at Baroda  and the complainant the service centre  i.e. OP 3  and requested to rectify the defect . The OP 3  received the said handset  and acknowledge the same and intimated the complainant that  they will replace the  complete motherboard  of the said mobile. The complainant approached the OP3  no. of times but the OP 3  on one pretext or the  other  was going on postponing  and after lapse of one month i.e. on 30.12.2015  the OP 3 returned  the said mobile set without causing proper service and the complainant has found the same defects .  The complainant approached the OP 1 for replacement of the mobile but the OP 1 refused the replace the same. Hence, finding no other option the complainant  prayed  before this forum to direct the Ops to  replace the defective mobile set with anew  or refund the said amount of Rs.8999/-  and pay compensation for mental agony and cost of litigation. Hence, this complaint.

                                                     

                                 On being noticed, neither the O.ps  appeared  nor filed   file any written version  as such the Ops were  set exparte and we proceeded the matter in absence of the Ops and  passed order accordingly.

                        Heard and perused the complaint petition and documents filed by the complainant and we accept the grievance of the complainant. The Complainant  argued that the O.ps have sold a defective  mobile set  to the complainant and claimed that the O.ps caused deficiency in service and deprived of the complainant of enjoyment of the mobile set  since the date of  its purchase  which caused mental agony and harassment to the complainant.

Now we have to see whether there was any negligence of the Ops  in providing  after sale service  to the complainant as alleged ?

 

We perused the documents filed by the complainant.  Since the mobile set found defective after its purchase    and   the complainant  informed the Ops regarding the defect but the  Ops   failed to remove  the defect . At this stage we hold that  if the mobile set  require  servicing since  the date of its purchase, then it can be presumed that it is defective one and if the defective mobile set  is sold to the complainant , the complainant is entitled to get refund of the price of the article or to replace a new  one or  remove the defects  and also the   complainant is entitled  and has a right to claim compensation and cost to meet his mental agony , financial loss.  In the instant case  as it is appears that the mobile set  which was purchased by the complainant had developed  defects and the O.ps were unable to restore its normal functioning during the warranty period. It appears that the complainant invested  a substantial amount and purchased the mobile set  with an expectation to have the effective benefit of use of the article. In this case, the complainant was deprived of getting beneficial use of the article and deprived of using the mobile set  for such  and the defecates were not removed by the O.ps who  know the defects from time to time from the complainant.

Hence, in our view the complainant has right to claim compensation to meet  his mental agony, financial loss. Hence,  it is ordered.

 

                                           ORDER

                        The  opposite parties  are directed to refund the cost of the mobile set  i.e. Rs.8,999/-   and pay  compensation of Rs.1,000/-  for mental agony undergone by the complainant and cost of Rs.500/- . Further, we direct the Ops to pay the aforesaid award amount  within one month from the date of receipt of this order, failing which the O.Ps are liable to pay  interest  @  12%  p.a. on the above awarded amount till  the date of payment. Accordingly the complaint is allowed.

                        Pronounced in open forum today on this 30th   day of March,2017 under the seal and signature of this forum.

                         A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements , be forwarded to the parties    free of charge.

 

 

            Member                                                                                              President I/c

Documents relied upon:

By the complainant:

1. Xerox copy of Delivery Challan
2. Xerox copy of Retail Invoice
3. Xerox copy of Receipt Acknowledgement

 By the Opp.Party: Nil

 

                                                                                                          President I/c