MR LAXMI NARAYAN PADHI, PRESIDENT…              The complaint in brief is that, the Complainant had purchased a Mobile set Make Spice Mi 348E bearing IMEI.No. 911410604165083 on dated 05/11/2015 from OP.No-1 by paying an amount of Rs.2600/-. After purchase of just one week the mobile hand set appears problems like, hang, applications not properly works, display on/off automatically & charge do not take properly etc. After showing the problems, the complainant approach the OP.1 but who instead of provide service refused the complainant. Hence she on dt.13.11.2015 approached the authorized service center i.e. OP.2 for repair, who tried his best to redeem the set but fails to rectify the defect and also advised the complainant to contact the company. Hence the complainant approached the OP.3 on dt.08.12.2015 through their customer care bearing No.18602001003 who assured to repair the set through their service center and also issued complaint Registration No.512193593 but all the assurances are in vain. Hence the complainant contended that, there is inherent manufacture defect in the mobile set and as per the warranty conditions the OP.s should provide service to her but the OP.s failed to do the same. The complainant is an educated unemployed housewife and purchased the mobile set from her long hard earn corpus money. Hence the complainant inflicted great losses which cannot alteration in terms of money. The complainant being an educated house wife mobile is highly necessary for her life, hence finding no other way she purchased another mobile set by paying Rs.3000/- from her hard earn money, hence she suffered mentally and financially with the defective set, hence craves the leave of this forum under compulsions and seeking justice. So she prayed before the forum to direct the OP.s to pay the price of the said handset as mentioned above along with a sum of Rs.25,000/- as compensation and Rs.5,000/- towards cost of the litigation for such negligent and deficiency in service on the part of the OP.s.

2.         On the other hand the counsel for OP.3 entered his appearance and filed counter wherein he except evasive denials averred nothing in contradiction to the complaint. The complainant has filed cash invoice of the alleged mobile along with warranty card of the set. The complainant & counsel for OP.3 have heard the case at length, perused the record and submissions considered.

3.         The consumer protection act is a socio economic beneficial law, intended for speedy delivery of justice to the aggrieved and needy consumers and every complaint is supposed to be disposed off within a timeframe in consonance with the objects of the benevolent legislature, but inordinate delay in procurement of evidences and counter by the parties have emerged for reaching delirium to achievement of such objects.

4.         From the above submissions, it is found that the complainant has procured the mobile set on dt.05.11.2015 and the same became defect with in warranty time. The complainant approached the OP.s for necessary repair averring the alleged troubles, but the OP.s neither mend the set nor replaced the same with a new one despite of several requests. Considering the evidences, submissions by the complainant, we are of the view that, the mobile set purchased by the complainant has some serious manufacturing defect and the OP.s failed to provide service to the complainant within warranty period. Thus the complainant under compulsion purchased another mobile by paying Rs.3000/- and suffered mental agony with the defective set, and also inflicted financial losses and valuable times due to the negligence and unfair practices of OP.s, hence she file the instant case and prayed for compensation.

5.         From the above discussions and perusing the submissions filed by the complainant, we have carefully examined the alleged mobile set and found internal defects. It is further noticed that, the OP.s despite receiving notice of this forum are failed to take any initiations to settle the matter of the complainant, hence we feel that the action of OP.s is illegal and unfair which amounts to deficiency in service and hence they found guilty under the provisions of C.P.Act 1986, hence the complainant is entitled for relief. So the complaint is allowed against the OP.s with costs.

                                                    O  R  D  E  R

i.          The opposite party no.1, 2 & 3 supra are severally and collaterally directed to pay the price of the set Rs.2600/- (Two thousand & six hundred) inter alia, to pay Rs.9,000/-(Nine thousand) as compensation and a sum of Rs.5000/-(Five 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 bear 12% interest per annum till its realization. Pronounced on 10th day of March' 2016.

      Sd/-                                 Sd/-                                           Sd/-

MEMBER                      MEMBER                        PRESIDENT, DCDRF,

                                                                                     NABARANGPUR.