BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ERNAKULAM.

Date of filing : 16.02.2016

Date of Order : 02.07.2020

PRESENT:

Shri. V.S.Manulal President-in-charge

Shri. V.Ramachandran Member,

Smt.Sreevidhia T.N., Member.

CC.No.108/2016

Between

O R D E R

Srevidhia T.N., Member

1. A brief statement of facts of this complaint is as stated below:

The complainant Sri. Jayachandran S purchased an apple Mobile phone 5S IMEI No. 359271068302060 from the 1^st opposite party on 22.11.2015 for Rs.26,750/- manufactured by the 4^th opposite party. The 3^rd opposite party is the service centre attached to the 1^st opposite party.

The mobile phone went out of order on next day of its purchase itself. The complainant returned the said phone to the 1^st opposite party. Then a new phone of the same series was given to the complainant. But that phone was also went out of order. Another phone of same series was given to the complainant. The opposite party said that the phone had brought from Madras and will be free from defect. The said phone also went out of order. Hence the complainant requested the 1^st opposite party for return of money instead of replacement of phone. The complainant entrusted the defective phone to the 1^st opposite party. The Manager of the 1^st opposite party received back the phone and told the complainant that price money of the phone will not be returned.

The complainant submitted that the 1^st opposite party supplied defective phone for cheating the complainant and to appropriate money from the complainant . The complainant suffered mental pain and monetary loss due to the deficient service (marketing) rendered by the opposite parties. Hence the complainant approached before the Forum for directing the opposite parties to pay the complainant a sum of Rs.26,750/- as return of the price of the defective mobile phone to the complainant with interest @ 18% per annum from the date of complaint till realization and to direct the opposite parties to pay a sum of Rs.25,000/- as compensation for the mental pain and agony suffered by the complainant and the cost of proceedings from the opposite parties.

Notices were issued to the opposite parties from this Forum on 23.02.2016. The 1^st, 3^rd, and 4^th opposite parties filed their respective versions in response to the notices received by them.

3) Version of the 1^st opposite party

The 1^st opposite party in their version states that there is any deficiency in service on the part of the 1^st opposite party. The 1^st opposite party had sold the mobile phone which is defect free and the allegation of the complainant that the mobile phone went out of order is without any merit and hence denied. The 1^st opposite party had never cheated the complainant by the defective phone. The 1^st opposite party is in no way liable or responsible to compensate the complainant.

4) Version filed by the 3^rd opposite party.

The 3^rd opposite party is the authourised dealer and service agents of ‘Apple’ products in India and the 3^rd opposite party has not manufactured any phone as alleged. The 3^rd opposite party does not the manufacturer of any product. So the 3^rd opposite party is not liable to pay any amount under any head.

5) Version of the 4^th opposite party

The 4^th opposite party in their version states that they are a world renowned market and innovation leader on the telecommunication devices, computing and communication space. The i phone sold in India by the 4^th opposite party through their authorized dealers are known for their cutting edge technology and utmost customer satisfaction. There is no evidence brought on record by the complainant to support the allegations raised by the complainant in the compliant. It is submitted that the liability of the manufacturer arises only and only when there is inherent defect in the product when the said product was manufactured (ie., before the product was sold to the complainant) and it is a settled position of law that the manufacturer cannot be made liable until it is proved by adducing expert evidence that there was any manufacturing defect and the present case is not related to any manufacturing defect. When consumers cause damage to products by external factors which are not associated with manufacturing defect. The provision and terms of the Apple warranty specifically exclude unauthorized modification/tampering damage of products which is the case in the present matter. The complainant has failed to produce any service record to show that the present i phone was defective and was also replaced for the third time and hence the complaint is to be dismissed and not maintainable.

6) On the above pleadings, the following issues were settled for consideration.

(i) Whether the complainant had proved any manufacturing defects over the product purchased by him from the 1^st opposite party which was manufactured by the 4^th opposite party?

(ii) Reliefs and costs?

7) Evidence in this case consists of documentary evidences adduced by the complainant which was marked as Exbt.A1. The complainant filed proof affidavit on 25.07.2017. The complainant was mounted in box and cross examined by the opposite party 4 and his oral evidence was taken as PW1. Documentary evidence from the side of the opposite party 4 is Exbt.B1 to B3 and no oral evidence from the side of the opposite parties.

8) Issue No. (i)

The complainant had purchased an Apple mobile phone from the 1^st opposite party’s shop on 22.11.2015 for rs.26,705/-. The complainant alleged that there was manufacturing defect of the phone supplied by the opposite parties to the complainant. The mobile phone went out of order on next day of its purchase itself. The complainant returned the alleged phone to the 1^st opposite party and a new phone of the same series was given to the complainant. When the 3^rd time another phone of the same series was given to the complainant. The said phone also went out of order and the complainant entrusted the defective phone to the 1^st opposite party.

Exbt.A1 is the bill dated 22.11.2015 for having purchased an Apple mobile phone 55 on payment of Rs.26,750/-.

The 4^th opposite party produced three documents which were marked as Exbt.B1 to B3. Exbt.B1 is the extract of the minutes of the Board Meeting of Apple India Pvt.Ltd. Held on 31.08.2015 at No.24, 19^th Floor Concorde Tower C, UB City, Vittal Mallya Road, Banglore-560 001. It is an authorization letter to Mr.Priyesh Poovanna for handling the Legal and Regulatory matters of the company.

9) Exbt.B2 is the warranty card, from this it is very clear that there is one year limited warranty for the Apple branded productes only. Exbt.B3 is the service details of the phone on 30.11.2015 by the 3^rd opposite party. In the service details the problem reported was ‘The mobile phone shows dial pad in background intermittently. Data not committed and need to check internal condition’. The diagnostic details are ‘issue not resolved and the issue still persists intermittently and the i phone can be replaced under warranty service’. Space replaced and ready for delivery.

10) The complainant produced only one document. Exbt.A1 document ie., purchase bill of the product on 22.11.2015. This document did not prove that the complainant had to suffer at the hands of the opposite party due to any manufacturing defect of the phone supplied. The complainant did not adduce any job cards to show that the phone had any serious issues. Moreover, the complainant had not taken any steps from his side to examine the phone by an expert to prove that the phone has some inherent manufacturing defect. Considering all these factors, we are of the opinion that the issue No. (i) is against the complainant.

11) Issue No. (ii)

Having found the issue No. (i) is against the complainant, we do not consider issue No. (ii).

Hence the complaint is dismissed.

Pronounced in the open Forum on this the 2^nd day of July 2020.

Sd/-

Sreevidhia T.N., Member

Sd/-

V.S.Manulal President-in-charge

Sd/-

V.Ramachandran, Member

Forwarded by Order

Senior Superintend

APPENDIX

Complainants Exhibits

Opposite party's Exhibits:

Deposition :

PW1 :: Jayachandran S.

Date of Despatch ::

By Hand ::

By post ::

….............…