IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ALAPPUZHA
Saturday the 30th day of January, 2016
Filed on 31.07.2015
Present
1. Smt. Elizabeth George (President)
2. Sri. Antony Xavier (Member)
3. Smt. Jasmine D (Member)
in
CC/No.238/2015
Between
Complainant:- Opposite parties:-
Sri. Murali. R. 1. Samsung India Electronics Pvt. Ltd.
Raja Bhavan (Kandathil) B-1 Sector 81 Phase 2 Noida District
North Aryad P.O. Gautham Buddh Nagar, Uttarpradesh
Pin – 688 538
(By Adv. P.N. Shylaja) 2. Authorized Samsung
Mobile Service Centre
Friends Electronics, First Floor
Sas Mahal Shopping Complex
Vazhicherry Road, Alappuzha
3. Future Solutions, Kalavoor P.O.
Alappuzha (Retail Dealer)
(By Adv. K.J. Renjith)
O R D E R
SMT. JASMINE D. (MEMBER)
The brief facts of the case in short are as follows:-
The complainant purchased a mobile phone from the third opposite party for an amount of Rs.6800/- on 3.10.2014. The opposite party assured one year warranty for the said product. After 6 months from the date of purchase the phone became defective and the same was entrusted to the second opposite party for rectifying the defect. The second opposite assured to rectify the defect within 15 days, but the phone has not been repaired and returned so far. The complainant contacted the opposite parties many times, but the opposite parties failed to rectify the defect. The act of the opposite parties caused much mental agony and inconvenience to the complainants and hence filed this complaint seeking a direction against the opposite parties to refund the price of the mobile phone along with compensation and costs.
2. Notices were served to the opposite parties. First and second opposite parties appeared before the Forum, but they did not file any version and also absent in the subsequent proceedings. Hence opposite parties 1 and 2 were set ex-parte. The third opposite party filed version.
3. The version of the third opposite party is as follows:-
The third opposite party is only a dealer of the first opposite party and this opposite party has no role to the further activities and such things has to be done by the first and second opposite parties and requested to exonerate the third opposite party.
4. The evidence in this case consists of proof affidavit filed by the complainant and the documents produced were marked as Exts.A1 to A3.
5. Considering the allegations of the complainant the Forum has raised the following issues for consideration:-
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?
6. Point Nos.1 and 2:- The case of the complainant is that the complainant purchased a mobile phone from the third opposite party manufactured by the first opposite party for an amount of Rs.6800/-. The phone became defective when the warranty was in existence and the same was entrusted to the second opposite party who is the authorized service centre of first opposite party for rectifying the defect, but the product has not been repaired and returned so far. The complainant approached the opposite parties many times for getting it repaired, but the opposite parties failed to rectify the defect. The complainant sustained much mental agony and hence filed this complaint. The complainant filed proof affidavit and documents Exts.A1 to A3 were marked. Ext.A1 is the bill dated 3.10.2014 issued by the third opposite party. Ext.A2 is the warranty card and Ext.A3 is the job sheet dated 22.4.2015. From the documents it is evident that during the warranty period, the said phone became defective and entrusted to the second opposite party for rectifying the defect. According to the complainant, the phone has not been repaired and returned so far. The opposite parties failed to rectify the defect of the product which arose within the warranty period. The inordinate delay in rectifying the defect amounts to deficiency in service. The opposite parties have committed deficiency in service. So the complainant is fully entitled for the refund of the price of the mobile phone along with compensation and cost.
In the result, the complaint is allowed. The opposite parties 1 to 3 are directed to refund the price of the mobile phone Rs.6,800/- (Rupees six thousand and eight hundred only) to the complainant. The opposite parties are further directed to pay an amount of Rs.1,000/- (Rupees one thousand only) towards compensation and Rs.500/- (Rupees five hundred only) towards costs of this proceedings to the complainant. The order shall be complied within one month from the date of receipt of this order. Failing which the amount of Rs.6,800/- shall carry interest @ 10% per annum from the date of order till realization.
Pronounced in open Forum on this the 30th day of January, 2016.
Sd/- Smt. Jasmine.D. (Member)
Sd/- Smt. Elizabeth George (President) Sd/- Sri. Antony Xavier (Member)
Appendix:-
Evidence of the complainant:-
Ext.A1 - Bill dated 3.10.2014 issued by the third opposite party
Ext.A2 - Warranty card
Ext.A3 - Job sheet dated 22.4.2015
Evidence of the opposite parties:- Nil
// True Copy //
By Order
Senior Superintendent
To
Complainant/Opposite party/S.F.
Typed by:- pr/-
Compared by:-
