SHRI A.P.MUND, PRESIDENT: - Complainant  Sanjeeb Dueby has filed this complaint against the O.Ps alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice .Case of the complainant is that he purchased one  i Ball Stallon Smart phone manufactured by O.P.No.2 from the shop of O.P.No.1 on dt.08.02.2015 for a consideration of Rs.6,700/-. The smart phone is having IMEI No.911384500276627 and warranty period of one year. The complainant used the said phone around five to seven days from the date of purchase after which it has started to show operational defects. It got hanged while talking and call log option failed to show proper and correct call details. For this, complainant had to take out the battery to get it re-started. On doing it for several times, the flip cover  cracked of its own. Complainant approached the O.P.No.1 after travelling from Kuchinda to Sambalpur, who advised the complainant to approach the Service Centre of  i Ball Company, the manufacturer. The staff of the Authorised Service Centre received the phone and within a short time handed over it to the complainant stating that the defect has been cured. After ten to twelve days due to persistence of the problem, the complainant again approached the Authorised Service Centre of the O.P.No.2. But the staff of the Service Centre advised the complainant to approach the O.P.No.2, the manufacturer.

2. Complainant approached the O.P.No.2 and demanded replacement of the defective smart phone, which was refused by O.P.No.2.The O.P.No.2 also did not take any step to get the defective smart phone repaired by removing the defects to the satisfaction of the complainant.
3. According to the complainant, this is deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice  carried out by the O.Ps. for which complainant suffered harassment and mental agony. On the basis of this, complainant filed this complaint praying for a direction to the O.Ps for refund back of the purchase price of the defective smart phone, pay compensation of Rs.30,000/- and cost of litigation and any other fit and equitable reliefs. Complainant filed Xerox copy of Receipt No.37468 dt.08.02.2015 issued by the O.P.No.1 showing payment of Rs.6,700/- towards cost of the alleged smart phone.
4. Both the O.Ps were duly noticed by this Forum. But even after receipt of notice, O.Ps did not take any step to appear and contest the proceeding. Hence O.P.No.1 was set ex-parte on dt.06.7.2015 and O.P.No.2 was set ex-parte on dt.08.9.2015.
5. Heard the argument advanced by the complainant and perused the complaint petition and documents filed therewith. In absence of the O.Ps, we hold that O.Ps have nothing to say over the allegations of the complainant. As such we are convinced with the submission of the complainant and held that O.P.No.1 had sold a defective smart phone to the complainant and the defects could not be rectified by the Service Centre of O.P.No.2, the manufacturer. This shows the smart phone is having some inherent manufacturing defects, which are beyond repair.
6. Even after approach of the complainant, O.P.No.2, the manufacturer also failed either to take any steps for repair of the defective smart phone to the satisfaction of the complainant or replace the same with a new one. This action on the part of the O.Ps is clear deficiency in service and unfair trade practice for which complainant had suffered mental agony and harassment.                                                                                                                                                   
7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances discussed above, we allow the case of the complainant against the O.Ps on ex-parte and held the O.Ps jointly and severally liable for this. Accordingly, O.Ps are directed to refund the purchase price of the defective smart phone amounting to Rs.6,700/-(Rupees Six thousand seven hundred) with interest @ 12(Twelve) per cent per annum from the date of purchase i.e. dt.08.,02.2015 till the date of payment. O.Ps are further directed to pay to the complainant Rs.6,000/-(Rupees Six thousand) towards compensation for mental agony and harassment and cost of the present proceeding. O.Ps are to comply the order within one month from the date of receipt of copy of the order. Complainant is directed to return back the defective smart phone to O.P.No.1 on receipt of the awarded amount.