1.                     The brief history of the case of the complainant is that on going through advertisement he placed order with OP.1 for purchase of Mi Redmi2 handset which is the product of OP.3 and the Ops delivered the handset X00DVAPOX IMEI No.866392026221923 at Jeypore vide Invoice No.HR-DEL2-151792751-29930 dt.08.07.2015 for Rs.5999/-.  It is submitted that within one week of its purchase the handset started giving trouble like hang and Auto off and the complainant contacted OP-2 who passed certain instructions regarding usage pattern but in spite of careful use, it became heat while in use and sometimes became dead.  On contact to OP.2, he advised  to send the set to the Service Centre and accordingly the OP.2 received the set with complaint “set dead, set heat” vide Job Sheet No.7758 dt.16.9.15 and advised the complainant to come after a week.  However on repeated approach the OP.2 has returned the set on 13.10.15.  It is further submitted that after 2 days of use the same problem appeared and the set was again handed over to OP.2 vide Job Sheet No.1835 dt.15.10.15 for repair and from that date the complainant has been approaching the

OP.2 for return of the set in working condition but the OP.2 has been assuring the complainant that he has indented for a mother board from the company for the set which is yet to be received from the Company.  Thus alleging defect in goods and deficiency in service on the part of the Ops, he filed this case praying the Forum to direct the OPs to refund Rs.5999/- towards the cost of the set with interest @ 12% p.a. from 08.7.15 and to pay Rs.12, 000/- towards compensation and costs to the complainant.

2.                    Notice on OP.1 returned unserved with illegible postal remark.  On being served, the Ops 2 & 3 neither filed counter nor participated in the proceeding in any manner and remained exparte.  After giving sufficient adjournments in favor of the Ops, the matter was heard from the complainant and posted for order on merit.  We have perused the materials available on record.

3.                     In this case, the complainant has filed copy of retail invoice dt.08.07.15 issued by OP.1 which proves the sale of Mi Redmi handset to the complainant for Rs.5999/-.  According to the complainant, within a week of its use the handset became hang and auto off and on contact to OP.2 (ASC), it passed only instructions regarding usage pattern.  In spite of careful use, the handset became dead and the OP.2 advised the complainant to send the set for repair.  It is seen from the record that the OP.2 has received the set on 16.9.15 vide job sheet No.7758 and returned it on 13.10.15 after repair.  It is the further case of the complainant that after a couple of days the same problem noticed and the set was received by OP.2 vide job sheet No.1835 dt.15.10.15 for repair and the set is lying with OP.2 unprepared.

4.                     In absence of counter and participation of the Ops in this case, the above allegations of the complainant remained unchallenged.  From the job sheets filed by the complainant it clearly reveals that soon after the purchase of handset it became defective and in spite of repair it did not work.  The OP.2 has also kept the set to change the mother board after obtaining the same from the Company.  It is seen that after purchase the complainant has not used the set.  In the above circumstances, it can be easily concluded that the set has got some inherent manufacturing defect for which it could not be repaired in spite of efforts by the service Centre of the Company (OP.3).   Hence the complainant is entitled to get refund of its cost with interest from the Ops.  Further due to defective set and repeated approach to OP.2 for repair, the complainant must have suffered some mental agony for which he is certainly entitled for some compensation and cost of this litigation.  Considering the sufferings of the complainant we feel a sum of Rs.4000/- towards compensation and costs in favour of the complainant will meet the ends of justice.

5.                     Hence ordered that the complaint petition is allowed in part and the Ops 2 & 3 being jointly and severally liable are directed to refund Rs.5999/- with interest @ 12% p.a. from 08.07.2015 and to pay Rs.4000/- towards compensation and costs to the complainant within 30 days from the date of communication of this order.