Date  of filing of the Case:- 28.08.2017

Date of Order:-  30.07.2018

JUDGMENT

Sri A.K.Purohit,  President                                   

1.      The case of the complainant is that, he had purchased a Samsung mobile hand set vide Model. No. SM-E7004ZWDINS for a consideration of Rs. 18,900/- from the O.P.No. 3 on dated 29.9.15 and paid the consideration amount on the same date vide Retail Invoice No. 280 dated 29.9.15. The complainant alleges that after use of 11 months when the complainant was in a call the LCD of the said handset was cracked for which the complainant sustain injury on his finger. To this the complainant requested the authorized service center O.P.No. 2 for repair but till date neither there was any repair nor the hand set was returned to the complainant. Lastly the complainant sent a pleader notice to the O.P. on dated 10.1.17 but there was no response from the O.P. Hence finding no alternative the complainant has prefer this case.

2.      Although notice has been served on O.P.No. 3 neither he appears nor has file his written version and hence he was set experte vide order dated 20.12.17. O.P.! & 2 have contested the case by filing their written version jointly. According to the O.P generally the crack in the LCD happens when the call is attainted during charging of the phone, which is not covered under the warranty and the complainant was advised for paid service to which the complainant has not given his consent.  The O.P. denied all the allegations of the complainant and claims no deficiency in service.

3.        Heard the complainant. Perused the written version filed by the O.P. In support of his case the complainant has filed the Xerox copy of Retail Invoice and service request acknowledgement. The O.P. have not produce any documents in support of their case.

4.       Perused the Retail Invoice issued by Manish Sales O.P.No.3. It is believed that the complainant had purchased the aforesaid mobile hand set from the O.P.3 for a consideration of Rs. 18,900/- and paid the consideration amount. It is also a fact that, the complainant has requested for service of his mobile handset on dated 29.8.16 to the service center O.P. 2 . It is also seen from the service report that the LCD of the said mobile was crack and battery was swelled. The complainant has not produce the warranty card . However the O.P. has admitted that the defect of the mobile was within the warranty period.

5.       It is argued on behalf of the complainant that the battery of the  mobile handset is a built in one and hence swollen of the same is due to manufacturing defect. This contention of the complainant has no force for the simple reason that, functioning of the battery is same whether it is built in or not. However when there is defect in the battery within a very short period of its use it is believed that there must be some fault in the quality of the battery. Therefore the battery is a defective one. Defect has been defined in Sec. 2 (1f) of the Consumer protection Act as follows:- “ defect means any fault imperfection or shortcoming in the quality, quantity, potency, purity or standard  which is required to be maintained  by or under any law for the time being in force or under any contract express or implied or is claimed by the trader in any manner whatsoever in relation to any goods.”

6. Therefore the O.Ps. are  duty bound to sell the defect free battery with the mobile hand set. The O.P. has not produce any evidence to show that the battery of mobile handset is a defect free one. Further it is seen from the material available on record that the O.Ps. have not yet able to repair the mobile of the complainant which shows that the defect of the mobile is not repairable and there must be some inherent defects in the hand set. It is the bound down duty of the O.P. to repair the hand set but the same has done which amounts deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps.       

7.     Under the aforesaid material available on record  it is cocluded that the mobile handset of the complainant isnot repairable and hence refund of price will be just and proper. Hence oredered:-

                                                                              ORDER

The O.Ps. are directed to refund Rs. 18,900/- ( eightteen thousands and ninehundred ) along with Rs. 1000/- ( one thousand )towards cost to the complainant within one month from the date of receipt of this order.

                                  Accordingly the case is disposed off.      

             Pronounced in the open Forum this the 30^th day of July 2018.

                        Sd/-                                                                              Sd/- 

                      (S.Rath)                                                                     (A.K.Purohit)

                      MEMBER                                                                     PRESIDENT