By Jayasree Kallat, Member:

 

            The complaint was filed on 27-2-2010. Complainant, Mohanan had purchased a Mobile phone on 29-8-2009 from opposite party. Complainant had paid Rs.5400/- to the opposite party. The very day of purchase the phone became defective.  Complainant could not make outgoing calls and could not attend incoming calls. On 7-9-2009 complainant had approached the opposite party requesting to replace the mobile phone. Opposite party refused by saying that phone will be replaced only if defect is reported within one week. Opposite party asked the complainant to approach the service centre. Complainant had taken the mobile phone to the service centre where they had changed the software of the phone. But the phone was not functioning properly.  When complainant approached the opposite party they refused to replace and asked the complainant to go to the service centre.   The phone purchased by the complainant, had a replacement  warranty of 6 months. Complainant is alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of opposite party. Complainant has filed this complaint seeking relief from the opposite party.

 

            Notice sent to the opposite party was served. But opposite party did not appear before the Forum. Hence opposite party was called absent and set exparte. Complainant was examined as PW1 and Ext.A1 to A4 were marked on complainant’s side. The mobile phone M.O1 was identified and returned back to the complainant. The complainant is alleging unfair trade practice and deficiency of service on the part of opposite party. The mobile phone purchased from the opposite party, Mobile Plaza after paying Rs.5400/- became non functional within one week of purchase. The complainant approached the opposite party as the mobile phone was carrying a replacement warranty which is marked as Ext.A2. The opposite party did not take any steps to redress the grievance of the complainant. From the evidence and the documents Ext.A1 to A4 the complainant’s case is proved. Complainant purchased the mobile phone on 29-8-09. According to the complainant the phone became defective within one week. As opposite party did not respond, complainant had sent a letter to the opposite party with acknowledgement due which is marked as Ext.A3 and A4. Ext.A3 and A4 is evidence enough that the phone became defective within 6 months of purchase. Ext.A3 is sent on 13-2-2010 and the acknowledgement card Ext.A4 which was returned back to the complainant shows the date 20-2-2010. In our opinion as there was deficiency in service on the part of opposite party the complainant is entitled to get refund the cost of the mobile.

 

            In the result the petition is allowed and the opposite party is directed to refund Rs.5400/- the cost of the mobile phone along with a cost of Rs.500/-. On paying the amount opposite party can get back the mobile phone from the complainant.

 

Pronounced in the open court this the 29^th day of May 2010.

 

SD/- PRESIDENT                               SD/- MEMBE              SD/- MEMBER

 

APPENDIX

 

Documents exhibited for the complainant:

A1. Photocopy of Bill dt. 29-8-09 issued by O.P. to the complainant.

A2. Photocopy of warranty card.

A3. Copy of Regd. Letter dt. 13-2-2010.

A4. Acknowledgement.

 

Documents exhibited for the opposite party.

            Nil

Witness examined for the complainant:

PW1. Mohanan.P.M. (Complainant)

 

Witness examined for the opposite party.

            None

 

                                                                        Sd/- President

 

                        // True copy//

(Forwarded/By order)

 

 

SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT.