SRI P.K.PANDA,PRESIDENT … The factual matrix of case is that, the complainant had purchased a mobile of SAMSUNG model No.J6 Plus SM-J610F and bearing its IMEI No.352682/10/105165/3 & No.352683/10/1051651 through OP-1 on dated 06.11.2018 for Rs.14,990/-. The complainant contended that, after its use for about Two months the said mobile reported touch screen/battery problem, overheating problems in its body part and did not function properly. Finding the defects, the complainant contacted with the OP-1 through whom the product was delivered to the complainant. The OP-1 received the alleged mobile handset and suggested the complainant to come after 7 days, so that he will consult with the OP-2.But after 7 days, when the complainant went to the shop of OP-,he returned the said mobile by saying that the mobile has been repaired and no need to replace the same. After using the repaired mobile the complainant found the problems along with some additional defect like discolor and instant hanging. Again the complainant handover the defective set to Op-1.After 15 days when the complainant met with OP-1 they replied the handset not yet been received from OP-2.After some days the OP-1 returned the set. After using the same handset again the set arise same problem. When the complainant approached to OP-1,they received and returned and replied that the handset suffers from inherent defects and needs to be replacement and suggested to contact with the OP-2.Till date the OP-1 neither contacted nor replaced the said handset or gave any proper service to the complainant and the mobile set is lying dead without any use.
So the complainant alleged that the OPs has provides him a sub standard set for a huge price, and to which act the complainant sustained mental agony, physical pain and financial hardship due to the malfeasance actions of Ops, hence there is deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of OPs. So he prayed before the Hon’ble Commission to direct the OP.s to pay the price of alleged handset and a sum of Rs.20,000/- as compensation, and Rs.5,000/- as cost of litigation for such unfair, illegal, deceptive and deficiency in service on the part of OPs proper in the interest of justice.
2. The counsel for OP.No.2 entered his appearance and filed counter to contend that, the case is not maintainable as the complainant approached this Commission not with clean hands. The allegation of inherent manufacturing defect is without exist or relying any expert or analysis report. The contentions of complainant areself explanatory, false & frivolous and the complainant should have put the same with strict proves. The complainant is not a consumer as the instant dispute is not a consumer dispute as there are no issues in the Mobile handset as alleged by the complainant.He further contends that there is no deficiency in service on the part of the OP-2, so prayed to dismiss the case with cost.
3. The counsel for OP.1 and 2 and complainant together heard the case minutely. The complainant has filed copy of some relevant documents to support his case. This Commission decided to proceed the case basing on documents as available in record on merit. Submissions after perusal considered.
4. It reveals from record that the complainant has procured the saidair conditioner on dt.06.11.2018 and the same found multiple defects from the beginning part of its purchase i.e. within full valid warranty period. It is seen that, the complainant time and again approached the OP.s intimating the so called defects, but the OP.s neither rectified the set nor replaced the same or paid its cost. The complainant first approached the OP.1 and being after fails, he approached others with a hope of repair. In our concerned opinion, the complainant having reputation ,earning for his livelihood and he has purchased the mobile set by paying a huge remuneration alluring great features by use ,but he restrained to facilitate the same, otherwise in the present case the OPs unless replace the same tried to patch up the latches having behind the product. On the other hand the OP.s neither replaced the product nor assured to pay of its price on claim of complainant. Perusing the evidences, submissions by the complainant, we are of the view that, the handset in question purchased by the complainant has inherent manufacturing defect. The service rendered by OPs being duty bound is not satisfactory, and the OP-2 being the principal is liable for the deficiency accrued on the part of its agents. As such the complainant suffered mental agony with the defective product, and also inflicted financial losses for the negligence and unfair practices of OPs, he prayed for compensation.
5. From all corners of the case, it is observed that, the OP-2 having challenged in their counter that the allegation made by complainant on manufacturing defect is without relying any expert report etc. Rather from catena of top court decisions held that "expert opinion/analysis report is not necessary for every case". Moreover in the instant case we have carefully examined the alleged gadget and found multiple defects as alleged. So the contention of OP-2 is baseless, hence we found that the OPs without following the warranty norms acts as illegal and highhanded manner, which seems gross abuse of process of law, per se, we found arbitrary and unfair practices on the part of OPs which amounts to deficiency in service. As thus the complainant is harassed as alleged hence he lawfully entitled for compensatory relief. However as the OP-2 is the manufacturer of the said handset, the complaint is allowed in part against Op-2 with costs.
ORDER
i.. The opposite party No.2 supra is hereby directed to pay the invoice price of the mobile hand set i.e. Rs.14,990/-, inter alia, to pay Rs.3,000/-(Three thousands) as compensation and a sum of Rs.2000/-(Three thousands) 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 shall carry 12% interest per annum till its realization.
( Pronounced on this the 29th day of Mar' 2023).
