Karnataka

Kolar

CC/49/2016

Sri.M.P.Narayanaswamy - Complainant(s)

Versus

Sangeetha Mobiles Pvt.Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

S.C.Venkatachalapathy

19 Oct 2016

ORDER

Date of Filing: 04/08/2016

Date of Order: 19/10/2016

BEFORE THE KOLAR DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, D.C. OFFICE PREMISES, KOLAR.

 

Dated: 19^TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2016

PRESENT

SRI. R. CHOWDAPPA, B.A., LLB…..    MEMBER (In-charge President)

SMT. A.C. LALITHA, BAL., LLB           ……  LADY MEMBER

CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO :: 49 OF 2016

Sri. M.P. Narayanaswamy,

Advocate,

Opposite St. Annes School,

P.C. Extension, Tekal Road,

Kolar City – 563 102.

 

(Rep. by Sriyuth. S.C.Venkatachalapathy, Advocate)            ….  Complainant.

 

- V/s -

1) Sangeetha Mobiles Pvt. Ltd.,

# 554/5, Sree Building,

100 ft Road, Annaiah Reddy Layout,

Doddabanasavadi,

Bangalore-560 043.

 

2) Branch Office Sangeetha Mobiles Pvt. Ltd.,

# 1697, Katha No.177,

S. Complex, M.B.Road, Kolar-563 101.

(Ex-parte)                                                          …. Opposite Party.

 

-: ORDER:-

 

BY SMT. A.C. LALITHA, LADY MEMBER

01.   The complainant having submitted this complaint on hand as envisaged Under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (herein after in short it is referred as “the Act”) against OP has sought relief as issuance of directions to OP Nos.1 & 2 to refund the mobile hand-set amount of Rs.10,203/- and costs towards deficiency in a sum of Rs.10,000/- and any other reliefs as this Forum deems fit.

 

02.   The facts in brief:-

(a)    It is contended that, OP-1 is running its business in mobiles and its accessories and also gives the insurance on purchase and OP No.2 is the branch office at Kolar.  On 12.06.2015 he purchased mobile hand set “Lumia 540 DS Black 1.2 Micro Soft” from Op No.1, at the cost of Rs.10,203/- with insurance coverage.

 

(b)    Further it is contended that, on 17.07.2015, as per the offer, he went to OP No.2 at Kolar and got 16 GB memory card on payment of gift card.  On 11.06.2016 accidentally the said mobile was fell down and broken when he was running in the rain to the shelter at Dharmasthala.  Thereafter the hand set did not work.  Since the said mobile was purchased under the coverage of the insurance policy bearing No.260200/46/14/9500000235 price protection policy No.1900215810, his approach for Ops was of no use.  Hence he got issued legal notice on 13.06.2016 to Ops, which was duly served but no reply, thus Ops are deficient in their service.  So contending, the complainant has come up with this complaint seeking the above set-out reliefs.

 

(c)    Along with the complaint the complainant has submitted following documents:-

(i) Cash payment receipt.

(ii) Legal Notice

(iii) Postal receipt with acknowledgement.

 

03.   As per the proceedings noted in the order-sheet dated: 06.09.2016 and 04.10.2016 OP No.1 and Op No.2 came to be placed exparte respectively.  Hence the complainant has submitted his affidavit evidence on 13.10.2016 and on same day an oral request of complainant heard his oral arguments too.

 

04.   Therefore the points that do arise for our consideration in this case are:-

(A) Whether the inaction on the part of the OPs would amount to deficiency in their service?

(B) If so, to what relief the complainant is entitled to?

(C) What order?

 

05.   Findings of this District Forum on the above stated points are:-

POINT (A):-  In the Affirmative.

POINT (B):-  The complainant is held entitled to refund of Rs.10,203/- by way of insurance coverage with respect to mobile “LUMIA 540 DS BLACK 1.2 MICROSOFT” together with compensation of Rs.3,000/- together with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from 04.08.2016 being the date of filing of this complaint till realization for being recovered exclusively from OP No.1.

POINT (C):-  As per the final order

for the following:-

 

REASONS

POINT (A) & (B):-

06.   To avoid repetition in reasoning and as these points do warrant common course of discussion the same are taken up for consideration at a time.

 

(a)    The averments in the complaint compelled with the said documents and evidence of the complainant by way of affidavit have remained un-opposed.  So, they are bound to prevail.

 

(b)    Even otherwise on going through the said averments and documentary evidence at the instance of the complainant, it cannot be disputed that, the complainant had purchased a mobile hand set “LUMIA 540 DS BLACK 1.2 MICRO SOFT” on the scheme with which covers under insurance policy vide No.260200/46/14/9500000235 price protection policy No.1900215810 (reliance placed on Invoice dated: 12.06.2015) for a sum of Rs.10,203/- and also as per invoice dated: 17.06.2015 he had purchased 16 GB memory Card – Toshiba from OP No.2.

 

(c)    On perusal of the documents such as legal notice dated: 13.06.2016 even though served to Ops (reliance on postal acknowledgements) remained silent and it was continued even for the service of notices of this Forum also being ex-parte.  It clearly shows that, the inaction of Ops was/is negligent and deficient in service.

 

(d)    Hence we are of the definite opinion that, as per the invoice dated: 12.06.2015 the said mobile though purchased by the complainant from OP No.1 was/is covered with insurance vide insurance policy No. 260200/46/14/9500000235 price protection policy No.1900215810 it is the bound duty of OP No.1 to rectify the defect when it occurred.  The silence towards it, leads to its deficiency in service.  Hence to put an end to the controversy we are opined that, the complainant should hand-over the said defective mobile hand set as in existing condition to OP No.1 and OP No.1 should pay back the consideration amount of Rs.10,203/- to the complainant together with compensation of Rs.3,000/- for the mental agony suffered by the complainant, further together with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from 04.08.2016 being the date of filing of this complaint till realization being paid exclusively by OP No.1 and same is dismissed against OP No.2.  Since it is an only branch office of OP No.1 and the said mobile was purchased by the complainant at OP No.1 and hence entire liability lies only on OP No.1. 

 

POINT (C):

07.   We proceed to pass the following:-

ORDER

01.   For foregoing reasons this complaint stands Allowed with costs of Rs.2,000/- against OP No.1 as here under and same is Dismissed against OP No.2 with no costs:-

 

(a)    We direct the complainant to return the said defect mobile hand set “”LUMIA 540 DS BLACK 1.2 MICRO SOFT” as in the existing condition to OP No.1, which they should receive, shall pay said sum of Rs.10,203/- together with compensation of Rs.3,000/- which shall also be together with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from 04.08.2016 being the date of filing of this complaint till realization from the OP No.1.

 

(b)    We grant time of one month to this OP No.1 to comply this order from the date of communication of this order.

 

 

 

02.   Send a copy of this order to both parties free of cost

 

(Dictated to the Stenographer in the Open Forum, transcribed by him, corrected and then pronounced by us on this 19^th DAY OF OCTOBER 2016)

 

 

 

 

LADY MEMBER                                    MEMBER(In-charge of President)