By Sri. K. Gheevarghese, President:
The complaint filed against the Opposite Party for defective phone hand set.
2. The complaint in brief is as follows:- The Complainant is the purchaser of a Mobile Hand Set from the Opposite Party's shop. The purchase price is Rs.1,650/-. The Complainant was not given any receipt for the payment of cash. Immediately after the purchase of hand set it became defective and at the time of purchase of the phone it was assured by the Opposite Party if any defect come across it would either be repaired or substituted with a new hand set. The Complainant entrusted the phone hand set in the Opposite Party's shop when it became defective. The Opposite Party were approached several times to get the hand set repaired. The non repair of the mobile hand set as per the terms of the warranty is an unfair trade practice. There may be an order directing the Opposite Party to take back the phone hand set and to refund Rs.1,650/- the cost of the hand set along with cost and compensation of Rs.3,000/-.
3. The Opposite Party filed version in short it is as follows:- The mobile hand set purchased by the Complainant is 2nd sale product no warranty or any replace assurance given by the Opposite Party to the Complainant. The phone hand set was purchased on satisfaction of the material. If any defect or any complaint evented this Opposite Party is not responsible either to replace or to repair the phone. The complaint is to be dismissed with cost to this Opposite Party.
4. The points in consideration are:-
1. Is there any unfair trade practice on the part of the Opposite Party?
2. Relief and cost.
5. Points No.1 and 2:- The evidence in this case consists of the proof affidavit of the Complainant, Exts.A1, A2 and MO1 series. Opposite party also filed proof affidavit and Ext. B1 is the documents produced.
6. The dispute is in respect of the Mobile Phone purchased from the Opposite Party it is admitted by the Complainant and Opposite Party that the Mobile hand set is purchased by the Complainant from Opposite Party's shop. According to the Opposite party the Complainant itself is born out from the criminal case between the Complainants son and Opposite Party. The copy of the FIR No.195 Ambalavayal Police Station is Ext.B1. The offense alleged against the accused is under section 420/34 IPC no other cogent evidence is brought out by the Opposite Party that the allegation of the Complainant is sprout from the criminal case. The phone hand set immediately after its purchase became defective and the Complainant purchased the phone giving Rs.1,650/- value of it is not disputed by the Opposite Party. Nothing is brought out in evidence to substantiate the contention of the Opposite Party that the phone hand set purchased by the Complainant is a 2nd sale material which was free from any conditions of replacement or repair. We are in the opinion that the Opposite Party sold a defective hand set to the Complainant which is an unfair trade practice. The Complainant produced the defective hand set and its accessories which is marked as MO1.
In the result, the complaint is partly allowed. The Opposite Party is directed to take back Mobile Hand set and its accessories deposited by the Complainant and to refund Rs.1,650/- (Rupees One thousand Six hundred and Fifty only) to the Complainant along with cost of Rs.500/- (Rupees Five hundred only). This is to be complied by the Opposite Party within one month from the date of receipt of this order.
Pronounced in open Forum on this the day of 28th January 2012.
PRESIDENT: Sd/-
MEMBER : Sd/-
MEMBER : Sd/-
/True Copy/
PRESIDENT, CDRF, WAYANAD.
A P P E N X I X
Witness for the Complainant:
PW1. K.K. Bhaskaran. Complainant.
Witness for the Opposite Party:
OPW1. Saifudheen. Opposite Party.
Exhibits for the Complainant:
A1. Copy of Letter. dt: 13.06.2011.
A2. Receipt. dt:13.06.2011.
MO1 series. Mobile hand set and its accessories.
Exhibit for the Opposite Party:
B1. Copy of First Information Report. dt:14.06.2011
