D.O.F:30/10/2021
D.O.O:28/02/2022
IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KASARAGOD
CC.No.191/2021
Dated this, the 28th day of February 2022
PRESENT:
SRI.KRISHNAN.K : PRESIDENT
SRI.RADHAKRISHNAN NAIR.M: MEMBER
SMT.BEENA.K.G : MEMBER
Aboobacker Siddique
S/o Abdul Rahiman
R/at Near Bignangi (H)
AB – A . Compound : Complainant
Mogral (P.O) 671321
Kasaragod.
And
1. Proprietor
M/s Savadika Retail Pvt Ltd
No. 130,256,259,268 & 283
Malur Industrial Area Hosakote Village
Lakkur, HDBLI, Maluk Taluk , Kolar
Karnataka – 563130
: Opposite Parties
2. Manager
Customer care Xiaomi Technology India Pvt Ltd
Ground Floor AKR Infinity- SY-113
Krishna Reddy- Industrial Area,7th Mail
Hosur Road ,Bangalore
Karnataka - 560068
O R D E R
SMT.BEENA.K.G : MEMBER
This complaint is filed by Sri. Aboobacker Siddique against flipkart. Complainant placed an order for mobile phone through online and received it on 09/06/2020. After 1 ½ years new updation came from the company and installed it. Thereafter the mobile camera stopped functioning. The aforesaid mobile phone belong to Xiaomi – Poco X2. While showing the phone in company’s service centre after examination it is informed that the motherboard of the mobile phone became defective due to updation and for repair an amount of Rs.8100/- is required. But this complaint occurred only due to the updation from company. The prayer of the complainant is either to repair the phone or to refund the price of the mobile.
Notice of Opposite Party No:1 returned stating “refused”. The notice to Opposite Party No:2 served. But both Opposite parties did not turnup. Name of Opposite Parties called absent, set exparte.
Complainant filed proof affidavit in lieu of chief examination and document produced is marked as Ext A1.
The issues raised for consideration are :-
- Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of company as alleged in complaint?
- Whether complainant is entitled for relief?
- If so for what relief?
For convenience issues 1 and 2 can be discussed together.
Here complainant placed order for mobile phone through online from Flipkart and received the mobile phone on 09/06/2020. After 1 ½ years new updation came from the company and thereafter the camera of the mobile stopped functioning. While examining the phone in the service centre it is informed that the mother board of the mobile phone became defective due to updation and for repair an amount of Rs. 8100/- is required. Ext A1 proves purchase of the mobile phone from flipkart. Due to new updation, the mobile phone became defective. Company is liable for the defect due to updation. There is nothing to disbelieve the allegations of complainant. In the absence of rebuttal evidence complaints case stands proved. Both opposite parties are jointly and severally liable to compensate for the loss of the complaint.
Therefore complaint is partly allowed directing Opposite Parties 1 and 2 to replace the defective mobile phone with a defect free new mobile phone of the same brand along with Rs. 3000/- (Rupees Three thousand only) as cost to the complainant.
Time for the compliance is 30 days from receipt of the copy of this judgment.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
Exhibits
A1- Receipt
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
Forwarded by Order
Senior Superintendent
Ps/
