IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KOLLAM
DATED THIS THE 16th DAY OF OCTOBER 2019
Present: - Sri.E.M.Muhammed Ibrahim, B.A, LLM. President
Smt.S.Sandhya Rani. Bsc, LLB ,Member
Sri.Stanly Harold, B.A.LLB, Member
CC.No.21/2019
B.Prabhash,
Snehas,
Njekkadu,
Vadasserikkonam P.O., : Complainant
Pin 695143.
V/s
Proprietor,
Choice Mobiles, : Opposite Party
Paikkada Road,
Kollam.
FAIR ORDER
Sri.Stanly Harold, B.A.LLB, Member
This is a case based on a consumer complaint filed under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.
The averments in the complaint in short are as follows.
Complainant approached the opposite party for servicing his mobile phone by brand name I Phone 65’ due to a crack in the screen, for which the opposite party demanded Rs.1900/- for clearing the defects of the said mobile phone and also asked to wait for an hour. Pursuant to this after a lapse of 5 hours the said mobile phone was returned by the opposite party. The complainant efforts to operate the mobile phone was failed, because it was not serviced in proper manner and while the complainant reminded the matter to the opposite party he replied that it should be serviced by an experienced technician and sought two days time for servicing. The complainant agreed and after the said time the mobile phone was released to the complainant as such but it indicated the same defects. On this occasion the opposite party advised to the complainant to consult with the expert service centre at Kazhakuttam. The technicians in the said service centre examined the mobile phone and they brought out the fact, that the entire system of mobile phone was damaged and directed to produce the same before the opposite party .
The complainant came before the opposite party and demanded to service the mobile in a proper manner or to pay the cost of the mobile. The opposite party was not willing, so complainant asked to list out the entire details of the mobile phone defects into writing. The opposite party agreed by giving an undertaking in writing.
The aforesaid mobile phone was not serviced properly, also it was damaged by the opposite party and not returned the same. Hence the complaint.
In response to the notice issued to the opposite party he has neither appeared before the Forum nor filed any version. Hence the opposite party set exparte.
The complainant filed affidavit by reiterating the averments in the complainant and got marked Ext.P1 document.
Heard the complainant who himself has conducted the case, perused records. Ext.P1 is receipt issued by the opposite parties choice mobiles Payikkada Road, Kollam dated 15.12.2018 by undertaking that the mobile phone I 65 will be repaired as soon as possible and returned to the complaint. The unchallenged averments in the affidavit coupled with Ext.P1would establish the case of the complainant. In the view of the materials available on the records it is clear that there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party, as the opposite party failed to arrange suitable remedy for rectifying the defects of the mobile phone of the complainant as well as not returned the mobile phone to the complainant. As a result of the complainant has sustained monitory loss apart from mental agony. Therefore the complainant is entitled to get the value of the mobile phone and also to get compensation for mental agony from the opposite party.
In the result the complaint stands allowed directing the opposite party to return Rs.6000/- being the value of the mobile phone and Rs.1000/- as compensation along with interest 9 % per annum from the date of the complainant till the realization.
The Opposite party is directed to pay Rs.6,000/- being the value of the I Phone and compensation of 1000/- with interest at the rate of 9 % per annum with costs Rs.500/- within 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order failing which the complaint is entitled to realize Rs.7000/- with interest at the rate of 12 % per annum from the date of complaint till realization from the opposite party and its assets by filing EP U/s 25 of the Consumer Protection Act.
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant Smt.Minimol S. transcribed and typed by her corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 16th day of October 2019.
E.M.Muhammed Ibrahim:Sd/-
S.Sandhya Rani:Sd/-
Stanly Harold:Sd/-
INDEX
Witnesses Examined for the Complainant:- Nil
Documents marked for the complainant
Ext.P1:- Mobile Phone receipt
Witness examined for the opposite party:-Nil
Documents marked for the opposite party:-Nil
Forwarded/by Order
Senior Superintendent
