Jammu and Kashmir

Jammu

CC/137/2018

GANESH SHARMA - Complainant(s)

Versus

SAMSUNG - Opp.Party(s)

CHETAN MISRI

26 May 2018

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,JAMMU

      (Constituted under J&K Consumer Protection Act,1987)

                                                          .

 Case File  No                477/DFJ         

 Date of  Institution      07-03-2018

 Date of Decision      :    25-05-2018

 

Ganesh Sharma,

S/O Bansi Lal Sharma,

R/o H.No.17 Gali Khilonia,

Pacca Danga,Jammu.

                                                                                                                      Complainant

                          V/S

1.Samsung India Electronics Pvt.Ltd.

   Through its Managing Director,

  A-24 Ground Floor Front Tower,

  Mohan Co-operative Industrial Estate,

   Delhi-110044.

2.Bedi Cycle Work,

    Near JDA Parking,City Chowk,Jammu.

3.  Smart Care Service Centre,

    Samsung Authorised Service Centre

   Opp.Shastri Nagar, Near Girls High Secondary School,

   Jammu.

                                                                                                                                      Opposite parties

CORAM

                  Khalil Choudhary             (Distt.& Sessions Judge)  President

                  Ms.Vijay Angral                                                               Member

                  Mr.Ghulam Sarwar Chauhan                                       Member

 

In the matter of: Complaint under section 10 of J&K Consumer

                              Protection Act 1987.

     

  Mr.Chetan Misri,Advocate for complainant, present.

Mr.Arvind Khajuria,Advocate for Ops 1&3,present.

Nemo for OP2.

 

                                                        ORDER

 

                         Facts relevant for the disposal of complaint on hand are that complainant is said to have purchased a New Samsung Galaxy J7 Prime Black Mobile bearing EMEI No.352929082947064,on,06-05-2017,against sale consideration of Rs.16,900/-from OP2,copy of bill is annexed as Annexure-A.According to complainant, the handset  functioned nicely for one month, but later on it developed problems like auto on off, Net work problem  for which he approached OP2,but despite rectification  asked him to approach OP3 for removal of defect through service centre. Allegation of complainant is that he again approached OP3 on,02-03-2018 by stating that the mobile suffers from multiple manufacturing defects like Network problem/Auto Drop and auto off and requested them to rectify the defects as the complainant is facing a lot of hardship for none of their fault. Allegation of complainant is that he has been cheated by the Ops firstly by selling defective handset and thereafter causing harassment and had made to suffer from pillar to post for getting his handset repaired from the service centre. Complainant also submits that neither defects have been removed by Ops, nor redressed his grievance, which according to complainant constitutes deficiency in service,therefore,prays for refund of cost of handset to the tune of Rs.16,900/-and in addition, also prays for compensation of Rs.70,000/-including litigation charges.

                  On the other hand,Ops 1&3 have filed written version and while denying the allegations of complainant, went on to submit that the complainant approached OP3 and has reported problem i.e. Network auto drop N auto off issues, accordingly mobile handset of complainant was immediately examined by the service engineer of OP3 without any delay and was checked thoroughly and no defect was found in the handset, but only on the request of complainant software of the handset was updated that too without charging anything from the complainant and the handset was handed over to him and only after fully satisfied with the work carried out by the service engineer  and took the delivery of the mobile set.However,such kind of minor technical problems regarding software generally occur due to mishandling of the unit, as such the Ops have not committed any negligence or deficiency in service. The Ops 1 &3 further submitted that they are still ready and willing to carry out any repairs as per warranty terms and conditions, in case any defect is found in the same.However,the onus is on the complainant to prove that there is any defect in the mobile unit. It is further submitted that there is no manufacturing defect in the mobile unit and neither there is any deficiency in service on the part of OP,therefore,complaint is misconceived and liable to the dismissed.

                      Complainant adduced evidence by way of duly sworn his own affidavit and affidavit of Manav Sharma. Complainant has placed on record, copy of retail invoice and copy of job card.

                  On the other hand,OP1&3 adduced evidence by way of duly sworn evidence affidavit of Joginder Paul alias (Rajesh Paul) Mobile Service Engineer, Jammu.

              We have perused case file and heard L/Cs appearing for the parties at length.

                        To be brief, grievance of complainant is that he purchased a New Samsung Galaxy J7 Prime Black Mobile bearing EMEI No.352929082947064,on,06-05-2017,against sale consideration of Rs.16,900/-from OP2 but ,within warranty period, same was marred by defects. Further allegation of complainant is that despite he approached OP3(i.e.authorised service centre),but OP3 failed to rectify the defects, which were manufacturing defects in nature.

                    On the other hand, OPs 1&3,while denying the allegations of complainant in toto,went onto submit that handset has been duly rectified by service engineer of OPs,therefore,allegations of complainant are unfounded and are designed to extract money.

                        In order to support his allegations, complainant has filed duly sworn his own affidavit. At the same time, complainant also produced bill dated 06-05-2017 for sum of Rs.16,900/-.

                     The complaint is fully supported by the affidavit of complainant, so in the given circumstances of the case, and in view of evidence on record, there is no reason to disbelieve the averments made by complainant in complaint.

                 From perusal of averments contained in the complaint, it is manifestly clear that from the very beginning, handset started giving trouble,whereas,despite repeated requests to Ops the handset could not be

made  workable,therefore,in our opinion once high-end hand set purchased by complainant,obviously,without any rhyme or reason, question of grouse, regarding fault of handset would not have arisen, instead of making use of it. Rather we think Ops should have redressed grievance of complainant, who spent such huge money and banked upon such multinational brand, but it seems that instead of well coming the consumer,Ops have chosen to multiply  suffering, which of course is unwarranted and unexpected from such brand. Therefore, in the light of unrebutted averments contained in the complaint and documents on record, we are of the opinion that complainant successfully made out a case of manufacturing defect in the mobile unit of the complainant, as well as, deficiency in service by Ops.

                   Therefore, in view of aforesaid discussion, the complaint filed by the complainant for redressal of his grievance is allowed and Ops 1&3 are jointly and severally directed to refund cost of handset to the tune of Rs.16,900/- to complainant, who shall return the mobile phone, alongwith accessories to the opposite parties. The Ops 1&3 are also directed to pay Rs.6000/-as compensation for causing harassment and mental agony and litigation charges of Rs.5000/-to the complainant. The Ops 1&3 shall comply the order jointly and severally, within six weeks, from the date of receipt of this order. Copy of this order be provided to parties, free of costs. The complaint is accordingly, disposed of and file be consigned to records after its due compilation.

.Order per President                                              Khalil Choudhary

                                                                         (Distt.& Sessions Judge)

Announced                                                              President

 25 -05-2018                                                   District Consumer Forum

Agreed by                                                                Jammu.

 

Ms.Vijay Angral          

Member        

 

Mr.Ghulam Sarwar Chauhan,

Member