Kerala

Thiruvananthapuram

CC/39/2020

M Rasheed - Complainant(s)

Versus

Proprietor, Queens Mobile world - Opp.Party(s)

13 Apr 2022

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES

REDRESSAL COMMISSION

VAZHUTHACAUD THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

 

PRESENT

                               SRI.P.V.JAYARAJAN              : PRESIDENT

SMT.PREETHA.G.NAIR   : MEMBER

                               SRI.VIJU.V.R.                    : MEMBER

CC .No.39/2020 (Filed on : 03.02.2020)

ORDER: 17.01.2022

COMPLAINANT

          M.Rasheed,

          Court view, Perapp,

          Kallara, Kattupuram.P.O

          Thiruvananthapuram

          (Party in person)

                                                          VS

OPPOSITE PARTY

          Proprietor,

          Queens Mobile World,

          Kallara.P.O,

          Thiruvananthapuram,

          Pin – 695608

                   (Exparte)

ORDER

SRI. VIJU  V.R.             :  MEMBER

1.       The complainant has presented this complaint before this Commission under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986, alleging that he had purchased a mobile phone on 12/7/19 from the opposite party. But it became non-functioning after one week. The complainant approached the opposite party and they returned it after repairing. Again it became non-functioning & the complainant approached the opposite party on 27/10/19 for repairing the same. After that the opposite party has not given back the mobile to the complainant. The act of opposite party amounts to unfair trade practice and deficiency in service, hence this complaint.

2.       Even though the opposite party received notice, the opposite party did not appear before this Commission and opposite party was set exparte.

Issues to be ascertained:

1. Whether there is deficiency in service from the side of opposite party?
2. Whether the complainant is entitled to get the reliefs?

Issues (i) and (ii)

The complainant had filed affidavit in-lieu of chief examination and has produced two documents which were marked as Exts. P1 & P2. It can be seen from Ext. P1 that the complainant has purchased the mobile phone from the opposite party and from Ext P2 it is clear that the same was entrusted to the opposite party. The opposite party did not turn up.  Hence the deposition of the complainant stands unshaken and there is nothing to rebut the evidence put forth by the complainant to the complainant.  The opposite party is bound to service the mobile phone. But they haven’t done that. From the documents produced by the complainant, we find that the complainant has succeeded in proving his case and there is deficiency in service from the side of opposite party. Hence the opposite party is liable to compensate the complainant.

            In the result, the complaint is allowed.  The opposite party is directed to pay Rs 7400/- (Rupees Seven thousand four hundred only) and pay Rs.4,000/- (Rupees four thousand only) as compensation to the complainant for the mental agony suffered by the complainant and Rs.2,500/- (Rupees two thousand only) towards the cost of the proceedings within one month from the date of receipt of this order failing which the entire amount except cost carries interest @ 9% per annum from the date of order till realisation.

                     A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties free of charge and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room.

 

                       Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Forum, this the 17^th day of January 2022.

 

                                                                                                                                                                           Sd/-            

P.V.JAYARAJAN         : PRESIDENT

 

                                                                                                                                                                                  Sd/-          

  PREETHA .G.NAIR: MEMBER

 

                                                                                                                                                                                       Sd/-      

VIJU.V.R   : MEMBER

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Be/

 

APPENDIX

CC.NO.39/2020

COMPLAINANT’S WITNESS

1.  

Exhibits for the Complainant

1.  

 

1.  

 

OPPOSITE PARTY’S WITNESS- NIL

 

Exhibits for the opposite party- NIL

 

COURT EXHIBITS- NIL

 

 

                                                                                             Sd/-

                                                                                      PRESIDENT

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

BEFORE THE DISTRICT

 CONSUMER DISPUTES

REDRESSAL COMMISSION

VAZHUTHACAUD

THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

 

 

CC .No.39/2020

ORDER: 17.01.2022