DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BHIWANI.

   CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO.294 of 2014

                                         DATE OF INSTITUTION: - 16-10-2014

                                                   DATE OF ORDER: 18-10-2016

Gopal son of Shri Ram Kumar, Proprietor M/s Gopal Marvel Store, Saini Pura, Charkhi Dadri, District Bhiwani.

            ……………Complainant.

VERSUS              

1. Sachin Proprietor M/s Sachin Enterprises, Old Bus Stand, Charkhi Dadri, District Bhiwani.

2. Proprietor Jai Shriram Mobiles through Proprietor 1^st Floor Near Bus Stand Opposite Bank of India Charkhi Dadri, District Bhiwani.

………….. Opposite Parties.

COMPLAINT U/S 12 & 13 OF CONSUMER PROECTION ACT

BEFORE: -  Shri Rajesh Jindal, President.

                   Ms. Anamika Gupta, Member.

Mrs. Sudesh, Member.

Present:-    Sh. Neeraj, Advocate for complainant.

       OPs exparte.

ORDER:-

Rajesh Jindal, President:

                    In brief, the grievance of the complainant is that on 28.04.2013 he had purchased Karboon Mobile Set  for a sum of Rs. 12,000/- from OP no. 1.  It is alleged that since very beginning of the purchase of the mobile phone, there was a manufacturing defect and approached to OP no. 1.  It is alleged that the complainant many times visited in the shop of OP no. 1 to collect his mobile set but the OP no. 1 neither get repair the mobile set nor get change the same from the company and lastly he told to him to visit in the shop of OP no. 2.  It is alleged that Ops no. 1 & 2 was in collusion with each other and due to this they intentionally and deliberately did not return the mobile set of the complainant on his several requests.  He also served a legal notice to the Ops but to no avail.  The complainant further alleged that due to the act and conduct of the Ops he has to suffer mental agony, physical harassment as well as financial loss.  Hence, it amounts to deficiency in service on the part of OPs and as such, he has to file the present complaint & prayed for change the mobile set with new one alongwith compensation and litigation expenses. Hence this complaint. 

2.                 OPs have failed to come present.  Hence they were proceeded against exparte vide order dated 01.07.2016.

3.                In order to make out his case, complainant has tendered into evidence documents Annexure C-1 & Annexure C-7.

4.                 The counsel for the complainant reiterated the contents of the complaint. He submitted that the mobile handset is lying with OP no. 2 which was delivered by the complainant to OP no. 2 for repair vide job sheet dated 17.08.2013 Annexure C-3.   

5.                The mobile handset in question was purchased by the complainant on 28.04.2013 for a sum of Rs. 12,000/- vide bill Annexure C2.  That due to the fault in the mobile handset the same was deposited by the complainant with OP no. 2 vide job sheet Annexure C-3.  The Ops have failed to deliver the mobile handset to the complainant duly repaired despite the lapse of long time.  The Ops are guilty of deficiency in service.  Considering the facts of the case, we allow the complaint of the complainant and direct the Ops to pay a lumpsum compensation of Rs. 12,000/- to the complainant.   This order be complied with by the Ops within 30 days from the date of passing of this order. Certified copies of the order be sent to the parties free of costs.  File be consigned to the record room, after due compliance.

Announced in open Forum.                                 

Dated:18-10-2016.                                       

          (Rajesh Jindal)

                                                                                    President,     

                                                                        District Consumer Disputes

                                                                        Redressal Forum, Bhiwani.

                    (Anamika Gupta)       (Sudesh)

                          Member               Member