IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ALAPPUZHA
Friday the 30th day of January, 2015
Filed on 04.09.2014
Present
1. Smt. Elizabeth George (President)
2. Sri. Antony Xavier (Member)
3. Smt. Jasmine D (Member)
in
CC/No.224/2014
Between
Complainant:- Opposite parties:-
Ramesh Kumar. C.L. 1. Samsung India Electronics Pvt.
Chencheril House Ltd., B – 1 Sector 81, Phase 2
Aroor P.O., Alappuzha Noida District, Gautham Budha
Nagar, Utter Pradesh
(By Adv. K.T. Anishmon)
2. Sea Breeze, Multi brand Mobile
Store, Shop No. S – 50, GCDA
Complex, Marine Drive
Ernakulam – 31
3. X Press Solution, Skyline Tower
Shopping Complex
Cherthala – 688 524
O R D E R
SMT. JASMINE D. (MEMBER)
The case of the complainant in short is as follows:-
The complainant purchased a mobile phone from the second opposite party manufactured by the first opposite party on 8.10.2013 for an amount of Rs.10,900/-. The said phone became functionless due to the manufacturing defect. On 4.8.2014, the complainant entrusted the same to the third opposite party who is the authorized service centre of the first opposite party to rectify the defect. After inspecting the said phone by the third opposite party the complainant was informed that the circuit board of the said phone was damaged due to manufacturing defect and it has to be replaced. The third opposite party promised to return the phone within one week, after rectifying the defect. But the same was not returned even though the complainant made several visits to the third opposite party. Thereafter the complainant registered a complaint before the first opposite party (Reg. No. 8467651785). But the mobile handset has not been returned to the complainant till now. Hence the complainant filed this complaint.
2. Notices were served to the opposite parties, but they did not file any version and subsequently opposite parties 1 to 3 were set exparte.
3. Considering the allegations of the complainant, the Forum has raised the following issues:-
1) Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties?
2) Whether the complainant is entitled to get any reliefs as prayed for?
5. Issues 1 and 2:- Issues 1 and 2 can be considered together. The case of the complainant is that the complainant purchased a mobile phone from the second opposite party manufactured by the first opposite party on 8.10.2013. But the same became defective due to manufacturing defect. The complainant entrusted the same to the third opposite party who is the authorized service centre of first opposite party to rectify the defect. But the mobile phone was not repaired and returned so far and hence filed this complaint.
6. The complainant in this case filed proof affidavit and documents Exts.A1 and A2 were marked. Ext.A1 is the copy of the bill dated 8.10.2013. Ext.A2 is the copy of service job sheet dated 4.8.14. From the documents, it can be seen that the complainant purchased the mobile phone from the second opposite party manufactured by the first opposite party on 8.10.2013 for an amount of Rs.10,900/- and the same was entrusted to the third opposite party on 4.8.2014 for rectifying the defect. In spite of repeated requests and remainders the third opposite party failed to repair and give back the mobile phone to the complainant. The documents produced would show that the case of the complainant is genuine. Even though notices were served to the opposite parties, they did not file their versions. The allegations put forwarded by the complainant was thus not challenged. Obviously the complainant entrusted the mobile phone to the third opposite party on 4.8.2014. 3rd opposite party endorsed on the job sheet Ext.A2 that the hand set will be returned on 28.8.2014. But the 3rd opposite party failed to do so. The entire action on the part of the opposite party shows their irresponsible attitude. Despite service of notice from this Forum, the opposite parties have not turned up. Forum is fully convinced that the allegation put forwarded by the complainant against the opposite parties are highly genuine. According to the complainant 3rd opposite party has not returned the mobile phone so far and the same was intimated to the 1st opposite party by registering a complaint before the 1st opposite party. No effort has been taken by the opposite parties to return the hand set which was entrusted to the 3rd opposite party for repairing. So the opposite parties have committed deficiency in service. Therefore the Forum is of the opinion that the complainant is fully entitled to get refund of the price of the mobile phone along with compensation and costs. The opposite parties 1 to 3 are jointly and severally liable for that. So the complaint is allowed accordingly.
In the result, the complaint is allowed. The opposite parties 1 to 3 are directed to refund the price of the mobile phone Rs.10,900/- (Rupees ten thousand and nine hundred only) to the complainant. The opposite parties are further directed to pay an amount of Rs.1000/- (Rupees one thousand only) towards compensation and Rs. 500/- (Rupees five hundred only) towards costs of this proceedings. The order shall be complied within one month from the date of receipt of this order failing which the complainant is entitled to receive interest at the rate of 10% per annum on the amount Rs.10,900/- from the opposite parties till date of payment from the date of order.
Pronounced in open Forum on this the 30th day of January, 2015.
Sd/- Smt. Jasmine.D. (Member) : .
Sd/- Smt. Elizabeth George (President):
Sd/- Sri. Antony Xavier (Member) :
Appendix:-
Evidence of the complainant:-
Ext.A1 - Copy of the bill dated 8.10.2013
Ext.A2 - Copy of service job sheet dated 4.8.14
Evidence of the opposite parties:- Nil
// True Copy //
By Order
Senior Superintendent
To
Complainant/Opposite party/S.F.
Typed by:- pr/-
Compared by:-
