BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM

VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

PRESENT

SRI. G. SIVAPRASAD                                        :  PRESIDENT

SMT. R. SATHI                                         :  MEMBER

SMT. LIJU B. NAIR                                  : MEMBER

C.C. No. 511/2013 Filed on 02.12.2013

Dated: 16.08.2014

Complainant:

Selvan. M.R, M.R. Bhavan, Amman Nada, Kavalayoor P.O. Pin-695 144.

                             (Party in person)

Opposite parties:

1. Samsung India Electronics Pvt. Ltd., A 25, Ground floor, Front Tower, Mohan Co-operative Industrial Estate, New Delhi-110 044.

    

2. QRS Retail Ltd., ‘Thilakaraj’, Karamana, Thiruvananthapuram.

                                     

This C.C having been heard on 31.07.2014, the Forum on 16.08.2014 delivered the following:

ORDER

SMT. LIJU B. NAIR: MEMBER

Case of the complainant is as follows:  Being attracted by the advertisement on online that head set worth Rs. 2,290/- is free for mobile handsets purchased between 14.08.2013 to 30.09.2013, complainant herein purchased Samsung Grand hand set manufactured by the 1^st opposite party on 30.09.2013 from the 2^nd opposite party.  After the purchase, he was asked to mail the details from the same handset to the 1^st opposite party, as the offer is given by the 1^st opposite party, in order to avail that headset.  So he had done so.  But the headset was not delivered to him as against the advertisement.  So he contacted the opposite parties several times through e-mail and through call centre number and till now nothing happened.  So he filed this complaint before this Forum claiming compensation for unfair trade practice of the opposite party.

Notice was served to the opposite parties from this Forum.  But they failed to appear before us nor filed any version to clarify their position.  So we proceeded exparte against them.

Issues raised for consideration are:-

1. Whether the unfair trade practice of the opposite parties is established?

2. Reliefs and costs if any.

Issues (i) & (ii):- Complainant herein filed affidavit in lieu of chief examination.  He was not cross examined by the opposite parties since they were exparte in this case.  Ext. P1 is the advertisement given by the opposite party showing headset as the offer on purchase of mobile handset. 

On going through the pleadings in the complaint and the document produced by the complainant, it is crystal clear that an offer was given by 1^st opposite party, promising a head set worth Rs. 2,290/- as an offer on mobile handsets purchased between 14.08.2013 and 30.09.2013.  Ext. P2 clearly indicates that he purchased the handset on 30.09.2013, i.e; within the offer period.  For getting that offer, complainant tried all possible ways opened before him before approaching this Forum.  So he was unnecessarily dragged to litigation by the act of the opposite parties.  So he is to be compensated for this.  Hence we find that the price of the headset offered by the opposite party amounts to Rs. 2,290/- as is evident from Ext. P1 itself.  Complainant is not praying for getting that headset, instead for compensation for the unfair trade practice and deficiency in service of the opposite parties.  We are also unaware of the present position of the handset he purchased for which the headset is to be connected.  So it is just and proper to order the opposite parties to pay the price of the headset along with compensation since he was unnecessarily dragged to file a complaint before us.

In the result, complaint is allowed.  Opposite parties are jointly and severally directed to pay Rs. 2,290/- along with a compensation of Rs. 2,500/- to the complainant within two months of receipt of this order.  Rs. 500/- is ordered as cost. 

A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties free of charge and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room. 

          Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Forum, this the 16^th day of August 2014.

 

Sd/-

LIJU B. NAIR                : MEMBER

 

                                                                   Sd/-

G. SIVAPRASAD                   : PRESIDENT

 

Sd/-

R. SATHI                      : MEMBER

 

jb      

 

 

 

 

 

 

C.C. No. 511/2013

APPENDIX

 

  I      COMPLAINANT’S WITNESS:

                             NIL

 II      COMPLAINANT’S DOCUMENTS:

P1     - Copy of advertisement given by opposite party

P2     - Retail invoice dated 30.09.2013 issued by 2^nd opposite party

 

III      OPPOSITE PARTY’S WITNESS:

                             NIL

 IV     OPPOSITE PARTY’S DOCUMENTS:

NIL

 

                                                                                                             Sd/-

PRESIDENT

jb