This C.C. is coming on before us for hearing in the presence of Sri  Talluri Dilip, Advocate for complainant and the opposite parties 1 to 3 served called absent; upon perusing the material papers on record; upon hearing and having stood over for consideration, this Forum passed the following:-

ORDER

(Per Smt.V.Vijaya Rekha, Member)

          This complaint is filed under section 12(1) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. 

2.         The brief facts as stated in the complaint are that the complainant had purchased  CelKon A-107 Model Mobile phone on 13-07-2013 from the opposite party No.1 for an amount of Rs.6,700/-.  After few days from the date of purchase, the mobile phone started giving troubles, due to heating of mobile phone, the camera and software were not functioning properly.  Upon which, the complainant approached the opposite parties No.1 and 2 and kept the mobile phone with them for rectification but the problems were not rectified even after repeated repairs, the same problems were repeatedly arose within one or two days, then the opposite party No.1 suggested to approach the opposite party No.3 for availment of services, accordingly, the complainant brought the cell phone to the opposite party No.3 service centre and handed over the same to the opposite party No.1 on 10-04-2014.  The opposite party No.1 stated that to come back after one week for receiving the cell phone but they failed to rectify the problems even after making many rounds, due to which, the complainant suffered a lot, vexed with the attitude of opposite parties, constrained to file the present complainant by praying to direct the opposite parties to replace the mobile phone or to return the cost of the mobile phone together with interest @ 24% per annum from the date of purchase and also directed to pay Rs.90,000/- towards damages and costs. 

3.       Along with the complaint, the complainant filed affidavit and also filed the following documents, those were marked as Exhibits A1 to A3.

Ex.A1:- Bill dt. 13-07-2013 for Rs.6,700/-

Ex.A2:- Warranty Card.

Ex.A3:- Photocopy of Job Card, dt. 10-04-2013.

4.       After registering the complaint, notices were issued through this Forum. Inspite of service, the opposite parties neither appeared nor filed their written version to counter blast the averments of the complaint.

5.       In view of the above circumstances, now the point that arose for consideration is,

Whether the complainant is entitled to the relief

                   as prayed for?

Point:-

6.       According to the averments of the complainant and basing on the material on record, it is clear that the complainant had purchased Celkon A-107 Model mobile phone from the opposite party No.1 by paying Rs.6,700/- on 13-07-2013, evidenced under Exhibit A1.  Within few days from the date of purchase, it was started giving troubles and not functioning properly, the entire handset got heated up, due to which, the camera and the other parts were not functioning properly, and even after frequent repairs, the handset giving the same problems and as such the complainant approached the opposite party No.3 on 10-04-2014 and handed over the mobile phone for rectification of defects, evidenced under exhibit A3.  Exhibit A3 is the Job Card issued by service centre of opposite party No.2, wherein, the opposite party No.3 clearly mentioned as the problem was “camera, software and mobile heating”.  And it is the case of the complainant that the defects were not rectified even after keeping the cell phone with the opposite party No.3 for repairs for about two months and also averred that the opposite parties did not hear the request of the complainant regarding the replacement of defective mobile phone and also alleged that the opposite parties did not give proper services as assured within the period of warranty, in support of his case filed warranty card, marked under exhibit A2, according to which, whether there is any defect, arose within the warranty, it will be rectified or replaced according to the nature of defect and as such it is the duty of the opposite parties to replace the particular part or parts or the entire unit according the nature of defect, which arise in the mobile phone.  In the present case on hand the entire unit was giving troubles due to the problem of heating in the handset, it seems that it cannot be rectified by replacing one or more parts, only the problem can be rectified or the loss can be compensated by replacement of entire unit with new one therefore the point is answered accordingly in favour of the complainant.

7.         In the result the complaint is allowed in part, directing the opposite parties to replace the defective Celkon A-107 Model mobile phone with  new one or to refund Rs.6,700/- towards cost of the Mobile and also directed to pay Rs.500/- towards costs.  The order shall be complied with in 4 weeks from the date of receipt this order.

Typed to dictation, corrected and pronounced by us, in the open Forum, on this the 24^th day of October, 2014.

            FAC President              Member

District Consumer Forum, Khammam

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED:-

For Complainant:-                                                     For Opposite party:-   

       -None-                                                                           -None-

DOCUMENTS MARKED:-

For Complainant:-                                                     For Opposite party:-   

FAC President               Member

District Consumer Forum, Khammam.