Before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Rohtak.
Complaint No. : 444
Instituted on : 12.10.2020
Decided on : 28.11.2023
Poonam d/o Sh. Balkishan H.No.1869A/34, New Vijay Nagar, Rohtak.
………..Complainant.
Vs.
- Realme Mobile care, 1st Floor Narayan Complex Opp. NilliKothiNearChotu Ram Chowk, Civil Road, Rohtak-124001.
- Realme registered office, Tower B, Building no.8, DLF Cyber city, DLF Phase 2, Sector 24, Gurugram, Haryana 122002.
- ShreyashRetail Pvt. Ltd,instakart services pvt. Ltd., Plot nos. 230, 231 aarna project, old Delhi Road, simlamouza, distt. Hooghly Kolkata, west Bengal through seller flip cart.
…….Opposite parties.
COMPLAINT U/S 35 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,2019.
BEFORE: SH.NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT.
DR. TRIPTI PANNU, MEMBER.
DR.VIJENDER SINGH, MEMBER.
Present: Sh. AshwaniPhougat, Advocate for complainant.
Sh. Parmod Kumar, Advocate for the opposite party No. 2.
Sh. KunalJuneja, Advocate for opposite party no. 3.
Opposite party No.1 exparte.
ORDER
TRIPTI PANNU, MEMBER:
1. Brief facts of the case as per complainant are that he had purchased a Realme 3Pro Nitro BLUE mobile phone from the respondent no.3 for a sum of Rs.13999/- vide IMEI No.861488047758656 dated 07.06.2019. In the month of December 2019 the above said mobile phone started creating problem of ‘display automatic show blue and auto restart’. The complainant approached the respondent no.1 on 11.12.2019 and deposited his mobile phone for repairing and the same was returned to the complainant after few hours of its repairing. But after some days again the said mobile phone started creating problem like ‘screen problem battery drain fast etc.’ So on 11.02.2020 the complainant approached the respondent no.1 and deposited the handset for repairing and same was returned after repairing. But the mobile phone again started ‘Automatic show blue and auto restart’, ‘screen problem’, ‘battery drain fast’. Due to the alleged problems the complainant is unable to use his mobile phone properly. The act and conduct of not repairing/replacing the mobile phone of the complainant by the opposite parties is illegal and amounts to deficiency in service. Hence this complaint and it is prayed that opposite parties may kindly be directed to refund the cost of his mobile phone i.e. Rs.13999/- alongwith interest, compensation and litigation expenses to the complainant as explained in relief clause.
2. After registration of complaint, notices were issued to the opposite parties.Notice issued to opposite party No.1 received back duly served but none appeared on behalf of opposite party No.1 and as such opposite party no.1 was proceeded against exparte vide order dated 22.12.2020 of this Commission.Opposite party No. 2 in its reply has submitted that after regular and continues use of the device for more than 6 months(approx.) from the date of purchase i.e. 07.06.2019 the complainant approached the authorized service center and submitted his handset device on 11.02.2020. The technicians of the service center inspected the handset and put the device under the observation and after the observation, the service center replaced the display. The issue was resolved and the handset was handed over to the customer with full satisfaction on the same day. After that the complainant neither raised any complaint nor was any issue reported with the answering opposite parties. All the other contents of the complaint were stated to be wrong and denied and opposite party prayed for dismissal of complaint qua the opposite party no. 2.
3. Opposite party no. 3 in its reply has submitted that the complainant himself has admitted in the complaint that after using the mobile for six month, the complainant found some problems in the display and it was having manufacturing defects, automatically show blue and auto restart problem. Thereafter complainant approached to the service center, which clearly shows that the complainant was aware and full knowledge of the fact that the grievance of the complainant is only against the manufacturer i.e. opposite party No.2 and the service center i.e. opposite party No.1. It is further submitted, that the opposite party has delivered the product in a sealed box to the complainant(as was received from the manufacturer/distributor) within time. Hence there is no deficiency in service on the part of opposite party No.3 and dismissal of complaint has been sought.
4. Learned counsel for the complainant in his evidence has tendered affidavits Ex.C1/A, documents Ex.C2 to Ex.C6 and has closed his evidence on dated 25.03.2022. Ld. counsel for the opposite party No. 2 has tendered affidavit Ex.RW2/A, documents Ex.R2/1 to Ex. R2/2 and close his evidence on 24.05.2022. Ld. Counsel for the opposite party No.3 made a statement that reply already filed on their behalf be read in evidence and closed his evidence on 04.10.2022.
5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the material aspects of the case very carefully.
6. In the present case as per the Invoice Ex.C1, complainant had purchased the mobile phone on 07.06.2019 for a sum of Rs.13999/-. As per job sheets Ex.C3 to Ex.C5, complainant deposited his mobile set with the service center on dated 11.02.2023 as there is problem of “display automatic show blue and auto restart issue” and “Screen problem battery drain fast” in the mobile in question. As per Ex.C3 the mobile was within warranty period. But despite repeated repairs, the problems could not be resolved by the opposite parties. Hence there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties and opposite party No.2 being the manufacturer is liable to refund the price of mobile set after deducting the 30% depreciation on it as the complainant has used the mobile set uninterruptedly for 6 months i.e. to pay Rs.9800/-(Rs.13999/- less Rs.4199/-) to the complainant.
7. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, we hereby allow the complaint and direct the opposite party No.2 to refund the amount of Rs.9800/-(Rupees nine thousand and eight hundredonly) alongwith interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of filing the present complaint i.e.12.10.2020 till its realization and shall also pay Rs.6000/-(Rupees six thousand only) as compensation on account of deficiency in service as wellaslitigation expenses to the complainant within one month from the date of decision. However complainant is directed to hand over the mobile in question to the opposite parties at the time of making payment by the opposite party No.2.
8. Copy of this order be supplied to both the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.
Announced in open court:
28.11.2023.
.....................................................
Nagender Singh Kadian, President
..........................................
TriptiPannu, Member
……………………………….
Vijender Singh, Member
