Punjab

Sangrur

CC/403/2015

Bhupinder Bhardwaj - Complainant(s)

Versus

Samsung India Electronics - Opp.Party(s)

Shri Navit Puri

20 Nov 2015

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SANGRUR.

 

                                                               

                                                Complaint No.    403

                                                Instituted on:      04.06.2015

                                                Decided on:       20.11.2015

 

 

 

Bhupesh Bhardwaj son of Shri Parshotam Dass Sharma, resident of H.No.603, Street No.6, Mehal Mubarak Colony, Sangrur.

                                                        …Complainant

                                Versus

 

1.             Samsung India Electronics Pvt. Limited, B-1, Sector 81, Phase-2, Noida, District Gautam Budha Nagar, (UP) through its Managing Director.

2.             M/s. Gaurav Communication, Opposite PWD Rest House, Railway Chowk, Sangrur through its proprietor.

3.             S.R. Sales, Nabha Gate, Sangrur through its Proprietor/partner.

                                                        …Opposite parties

 

For the complainant    :               Shri Navit Puri, Adv.

For OP No.1              :               Shri J.S.Sahni, Adv.

For OP No.2&3         :               Exparte.

 

 

Quorum:    Sukhpal Singh Gill, President

                K.C.Sharma, Member

                Sarita Garg, Member

 

 

Order by : Sukhpal Singh Gill, President.

 

1.             Shri Bhupesh Bhardwaj, complainant (referred to as complainant in short) has preferred the present complaint against the opposite parties (referred to as OPs in short) on the ground that the complainant purchased one Samsung GT-19300BI-Metallic Blue (Dual sim) from OP number 3 for an amount of Rs.20,500/- vide bill number RI-453 dated 06.08.2014 which was having one year warranty.  It is further averred that in the month of April, 2015, the mobile set in question started to create the problem of network and as such the complainant approached OP number 3 immediately, who advised the complainant to approach OP number 2 i.e. service centre. As such, the complainant approached OP number 2 and requested to remove the defect therein, who after checking the same told the complainant to come after 2/3 days. After that the complainant approached OP number 2, who returned the mobile set and further assured that it is now without any fault.  It is further averred that on 2.6.2015, the same network problem arose in the mobile set and he approached OP number 2, who kept the mobile set and asked the complainant to come next day and also issued job card. On 3.6.2015, the complainant approached OP number 2 to hand over the said mobile set, who told that the set is not repairable and it contains manufacturing defect therein.  It is further averred that the mobile set in question has developed defects during the warranty period, which the OPs have failed to remove. Thus, alleging  deficiency in service on the part of the Ops, the complainant has prayed that the Ops be directed to refund the purchase price of the mobile set i.e. Rs.20,500/- with interest and further claimed compensation and litigation expenses.

 

2.             Record shows that Ops number 2 and 3 did not appear despite service, as such Ops number 2 and 3 were proceeded exparte.

 

3.             In reply filed by OP number 1, legal objections are taken up on the grounds that the complainant is not entitled to any relief as he has concealed the material and true facts from the Forum. The hand set of the complainant was last received on 2.6.2015 with the problem of ‘network’ and on inspection of handset it was found to be a software problem and accordingly an updated software was reloaded and hand set was delivered back to the complainant in OK condition. It is further stated that thereafter the complainant never approached the OP number 2.  It is further stated that the complaint is liable to be dismissed under section 26 of the CPA. It is further averred that the performance of the mobile set depends upon the physical handling of the product apart from compatibility of downloaded mobile applications and games. It is stated further that the complainant never approached OP number 2 after 2.6.2015.  On merits, the sale and purchase of mobile set in question has not been denied. It is stated that the complainant approached OP number 2 on 2.6.2015 with the network problem and the same was removed immediately. However, any manufacturing defect in the mobile set has been denied.

 

4.             The learned counsel for the complainant has produced Ex.C-1 affidavit, Ex.C-2 copy of job sheet, Ex.C-3 affidavit, Ex.C-4 copy of report dated 30.5.2015, Ex.C-6 copy of retail invoice and closed evidence. On the other hand, the learned counsel for OP number 1 has produced Ex.OP1/1 affidavit of Sunil Bhargav, Ex.OP1/2 copy of report of expert dated 29.10.2015, Ex.OP1/3 affidavit of Kulwant Singh and closed evidence.

 

5.             We have carefully perused the complaint, version of the opposite parties and heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties. In our opinion, the complaint merits acceptance, for these reasons.

 

 

6.               Ex.C-5 is a copy of the invoice dated 06.08.2014 issued by OP number 3 to the complainant for sale of the mobile set in question for Rs.20,500/-, which clearly proves that the complainant had purchased the mobile set and availed the services of the OP number 3. It is also admitted fact of the OP number 3 that the complainant approached him and he got the mobile set in question repaired from the service centre of OPs at Sangrur.  Ex.C-2  is the copy of acknowledgement of service request dated 2.6.2015 issued by the OP number 2 to the complainant clearly mentioning the ‘network prob’. Further present case of the complainant is that the mobile set in question purchased by the complainant was having continuous problem of  network.  Further to support his contention, the complainant has also produced on record the report dated 30.5.2015 issued by Shri Damanjit Singh proprietor of Singh Connectivity, Phirni Road, Sunami Gate, Sangrur, wherein it has been clearly stated that he checked the mobile set in question of the complainant and found that the same is having manufacturing defect due to which there is network problem in the mobile set which cannot be rectified/cured.  Further there is another expert report of Shri Kulwant Singh is on record, which is Ex.OP1.2, wherein it has been stated that there is no problem in the mobile set in question.  But, we are unable to accept such a report as the same has been issued by OP number 2, meaning thereby the OP number 2 will issue such a report favouring the OPs. In the circumstances of the case, we feel that it is a case of supply of defective mobile set to the complainant, which is beyond repairs.   As such, we find it to be a clear cut case of deficiency in service on the part of the Ops.

 

 

7.             In view of our above discussion, we allow the complaint and direct OPs to refund to the complainant an amount of Rs.20,500/- being the cost of the mobile set, subject to returning of the mobile set in question along with all the accessories thereof by the complainant to OPs.  OPs shall also pay to the complainant an amount of Rs.3000/- in lieu of compensation for mental tension and harassment and Rs.2500/- on account of litigation expenses.

 

 

8.             This order of ours be complied with within a period of thirty days of its communication. A copy of this order be issued to the parties free of cost. File be consigned to records.

                Pronounced.

                November 20, 2015.

 

                                                (Sukhpal Singh Gill)

                                                     President

                               

 

                                                   (K.C.Sharma)

                                                        Member

 

 

                                                    (Sarita Garg)

                                                       Member