BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER
DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BAGALKOT.
COMPLAINT NO. 55/2018
DATE Of FILING: 17/04/2018
Date: 23rd day of July, 2018
P r e s e n t:
01) Smt.Sharada.K. President…
B.A.LL.B. (Spl)
02) Smt. Sumangala.C.Hadli. Lady Member…
B.A (Music)
Complainant :- | 1) | Basavaraj S/o.Gurasangappa Gaddi, Age :42 years, Occ: Advocate R/o. H.No.05, 12th Cross, Vidyagiri, Bagalkot. (Rep. by Sri. R S Rajanal, Adv.) |
V/s
Opposite Parties :- | 1. 2. | Ramesh Ranganath Kandakur, Pro: Kandakur’s Mobile World, Darbar Compelx, Basaveshwar Circle, Bagalkot. Mahammad Gouse, Pro: M Gouse Mobile Solution Service Center, Near Allahadabad Bank, Bus Stand Road, Bagalkot. (O.Ps. 1 and 2 Exparte) |
JUDGEMENT DELIVERED BY SMT.SHARADA.K.PRESIDENT
U/s. 12 of the C.P. Act, the complainant has filed the complaint against the O.Ps. alleging sale of defective mobile hand set.
2) Inspite of service of notice O.Ps. remained absent. Hence placed ex-parte.
3) In support of the claim of the complaint, the complainant has filed affidavit and produced some documents.
4) We have heard the arguments of the complainant and have perused the records.
5) Now the point for our consideration is that whether the complainant has proved sale of defective mobile hand set by the O.Ps. as well as deficiency in service and that he is entitled to the reliefs sought?
6) Our finding on the point is partly in affirmative, for the following reasons.
:: R E A S O N S ::
7) The complainant has claimed that he purchased Lenova Vibe K4 (Black 16 GB) mobile handset worth of Rs.11,999 from O.P.1 on 25/05/2016 for one year warranty and its IMEI No. 861101031184694 and tax invoice No. 6535. After one month the hand set had charging problem with more heating, complainant approaches O.P.1 where he has purchase said mobile. O.P.1 advice that O.P.2 is the service center of this mobile handset and you contact O.P.2. then complainant was approached O.P.2 to service the mobile O.P.2 is check the mobile and repair the mobile on spot and not give any job sheet to complainant. Further, after ten months the same proble has occurred then complainant had approached directly O.P.No.2 this time O.P.2 checked the mobile and say that we had sending this mobile for repair for Bangalore service center and give the job sheet No.983 dt: 21/04/2017 for repair take the time of 15 days for that complainant agreed. After 15 days complainant had approached O.P.No.2, O.P.2 said that the mobile handset was not return from the service center come after one week.
Further complainant had approached both O.Ps. several time but O.Ps. are not response or not returned the handset to complainant. Complainant is Advocate and the mobile handset was very essential for his profession, for his necessity complainant purchased the new mobile Vivo V 5 for Rs.11,999/- on 15/05/2016 from O.P.1 and pay the cost, till today the O.P.2 had not return the mobile hand set.
As the opponents was not giving proper response hence it amount to deficiency of service and complainant had put to mental torture etc,. The complainant further alleged that on 06/02/2018 got issued legal notice through his counsel calling the O.Ps. No.1 and 2 to replace or return the Mobile hand set and the notice was duly served to opponents, but the O.Ps. failed to get the handset repair or replace nor replied to the said notice. Hence complainant constrained to file this complaint against opponents.
8) The facts referred to in the above paragraph are pleaded in the complaint and stated by the complainant in affidavit and supporting documents. The O.Ps. inspite of service of the notice has not appeared before the forum and not denied or disputed the claim of the complainant. Considering the material on record including the document, absolutely we have no reasons to disbelieve the statement of the complainant made on oath in the affidavit. So also, we have no reasons to doubt the claim of the complainant.
9) Thus, the complainant has proved sale of the defective mobile hand set by the O.Ps. and further, the complainant has proved that in-spite of the requests made, the O.Ps. or customer care failed to remove defects and to redress grievance of the complainant.
10) Accordingly, following order.
ORDER
Complaint is partly allowed.
The O.Ps. No. 1 and 2 are hereby directed to replace new mobile hand set of the same make with same feature with fresh warranty and guarantee within one month from the date of the order, failing which, refund the entire price of the hand set amount to Rs.11,999/- to the complainant.
The Ops shall have to pay an amount of Rs. Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand) for mental agony and Rs.2,000/- (Rupees two thousand) towards litigation expenses to the complainant.
The Ops are directed to comply this order within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of this order, failing which the complainant is at liberty to proceed the case against the Ops as per law.
Free copy of this order shall be sent to the parties immediately.
(Dictated to the Stenographer directly on computer corrected by me and then pronounced in the open Forum on this 23rd day of July, 2018).
(Smt.Sharada.K) President. | Lady Member. | (Smt.Sumangala. C.Hadli) Member. Member. |
