DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, PALAKKAD
Dated this the 10th day of December 2008.
Present : Smt. H. Seena, President Smt. Preetha.G. Nair, Member Smt Banumathi.A.K, Member C.C.No.49/2007
A. Kesavan Advocate S/o. Late S. Arumughan Kelappan Nivas Anthirathodi Edathara Palakkad . - Complainant (Advocate T.U. Shaik Abdulla) V/s
1. Reliance Infocomm Ltd “A” Block 1st Floor Dehrubai Ambani Knowledge City Navi Mumbai – 400 710.
2. M/s. Reliance Web – World Metro Complex Head Post Office Road Palakkad – 678 001. - Opposite party (Advocate Jayan.C.Thomas) O R D E R Order by Smt. H. Seena, President Brief facts of the complaint is as follows.
On 03/10/2003, complainant paid an advance sum of Rs.5,001/- and purchased a Reliance Mobile hand set of Samsung make with “R” World facilities from the 2nd Opposite party. Complainant paid installments at the rate of Rs.400/- for 36 months and became the owner of the set. On 25/04/2006 and on subsequent various dates complainant approached the 2nd Opposite party several times to get the battery attached to handset repaired as the battery set became defective. The second Opposite party not only refused to repair the battery set but also was asked to approach Samsung company. After a series of mutual correspondence and legal notice, this complaint was filed. Handset became almost dead as - 2 - the battery could not be charged. Complainant prays before this forum for an order directing the Opposite parties to take back the Reliance handset and the accessories and pay the value of the set deducting reasonable usage charge and compensation of one lakh rupees.
Notice was served on the opposite parties. Opposite parties filed version with the following contentions. The main contention of the Opposite parties is that the complaint is bad for non-joinder of necessary parties. The mobile handset of the Complainant is manufactured by Samsung Company and the repairs and services are also done by authorised Samsung agent. The Opposite party is only a telecom service provider and the complainant ought to have made the 'Samsung Electronics as a necessary party to the proceedings. Further the Opposite parties states as the Complainant has not furnished the details of his mobile number to prove the relationship with the Opposite party, Opposite party is not able to trace out any of his account if any with him. According to the Opposite party there is no scheme for Rs.50,001 and 36 monthly installments for purchase of Reliance Mobile handset of Samsung make.
Complainant filed proof affidavit Ext A1 to A7 was marked. Handset and accessories were marked as MO1. Opposite parties neither filed proof affidavit nor any evidence adduced in support of their contentions.
The issues for consideration are: Whether the complaint is bad for non-joinder of necessary parties? Whether there is deficiency of service on the part of the Opposite parties? If so, what is the relief and cost?
Issue No.1 Complainant has purchased the Reliance Mobile Handset of Samsung make from the 2nd Opposite party on installment basis. All the installments were received by the 2nd Opposite party . Complainant has privity of contract with the 2nd Opposite party alone. Hence the contention of the Opposite parties cannot be accepted. We hold the view that complaint is not bad for non-joinder of necessary parties. - 3 - Issues 2 & 3 Complainant has purchased a Reliance Mobile handset of Samsung make after paying an advance amount of Rs.5,001/- as evident from Ext A1 and payment of 36 instalments Opposite parties has not adduced any evidence to deny the sale. Further Opposite parties are taking advantage of a trivial clerical error in the complaint regarding the advance payment. In the complainant advance payment is printed as 50,001 instead of 5,001/- But it was correctly stated in words in the complaint itself and in proof affidavit. Opposite parties cannot escape liability on this trivial ground.
Further the contention of the Opposite parties that as the phone number of the complainant is not provided, they could not trace out of the details is of no sustance. It can be seen that the phone number is clearly mentioned in Ext A2 and Ext A7, the legal notices sent to the Opposite parties.
According to the complainant, the act of the opposite parties in not repairing the handset and asking him to approach the Samsung workshop, as they are the manufacturers of the set amounts to deficiency of service on their part. It is from the 2nd Opposite party that the complainant purchased the mobile handset. If there occurs any defect in the goods purchased or any deficiency in repairing the goods, Opposite parties cannot escape liability stating they are not the manufacturers or authorised service agents of the manufacturers of the goods. Exhibit A2 and A7 shows the steps taken by the complainant to redress his grievance. Opposite parties has not taken any positive steps to rectify the defect. We do not find any reason to disbelieve what is stated in the affidavit of the complainant in the absence of any contrary evidence.
In view of the above circumstances we are of the view that complaint be allowed. In the result, complaint allowed. Opposite parties are directed to pay an amount of Rs.19,400/- (Nineteen thousand Four hundred only) being the amount paid by the
- 4 - complainant together with Rs.2,000/- as compensation and Rs.1000/- as cost of the proceedings. Order shall be complied within one month from the date of communication of order failing which the complainant shall be entitled for 9% interest for the whole amount from the date of order till realization. Pronounced in the open court on this the 10th day of December 2008. President (SD) Member (SD) Member (SD) Exhibits marked on the side of the complainant Ext A1 – Cash receipt received from Reliance Webworld, for RS. 5,001/- Ext. A2 – Legal notice dated 06/07/2006 Ext A3 – Acknowledgement card Ext A4 - Letter of Reliance Infocomm dated July 17, 2006. Ext A5 - Bill of Reliance Mobile for the period from 25.11.06 to 24.12.06. Ext A6 - Notice of Reliance Communications & infrastructure Ltd for defaulting customers Ext A7 – Legal notice issued to Reliance Infocomm Ltd dated 31/01/2007.
Exhibits marked on the side of the Opposite party Nil Cost Allowed Forwarded/By Order Senior Superintendent
......................Smt.Bhanumathi.A.K
......................Smt.Preetha.G.Nair
......................Smt.Seena.H | | 
