DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BHIWANI.

   CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO.349 of 14

                                    DATE OF INSTITUTION: - 16.12.2014

                                              DATE OF ORDER: -15.12.2015

Pawan Kumar aged 35 years, son of Sh. Sunder Lal, resident of Rest House K Samne Vijay Nagar Colony, Tehsil and District Bhiwani.

          ……………Complainant.

VERSUS

1. Shree Giriraj Communication, Meham Gate, Opp. Kajal Nursing Home Bhiwani.
2. GMG Communication, Radhika Complex Hansi Gate, Bhiwani.
3. Intex Technologies India Ltd, D-18/2, Okhla Industrial area, Phase-2, New Delhi.

………….. Opposite Parties.

COMPLAINT U/S 12 & 13 OF CONSUMER PROECTION ACT

BEFORE: -  Shri Rajesh Jindal, President

  Shri Balraj Singh, Member

  Smt. Ansuya Bishnoi, Member

Present:-  Complainant in person.

                 Ops are exparte.

ORDER:-

Rajesh Jindal, President:

               Brief facts of the present complaint are that he purchased a mobile set of Intex Company from OP no. 1 for Rs. 7000/- dated 05.11.2013.   The complainant alleged that after purchasing the mobile set, the battery back up problem in the mobile set. The complainant alleged that he contacted OP no. 1 about the fault and OP no. 1 assured that the mobile set be repaired.  After one month, the OP no. 1 handed over the mobile set to complainant but the mobile set was not repaired.  It is alleged that OP no. 1 asked the complainant to contact with OP no. 2.  The complainant  approached the matter to OP no. 2 but he lingering the matter on one pretext or the other.  The complainant further alleged that due to the act and conduct of the Ops he has to suffer mental agony and physical harassment.  Hence, it amounts to deficiency in service on the part of OPs and as such, he has to file the present complaint & prayed for seeking compensation.

2.              In order to make out his case, the complainant has tendered into evidence Mark-A and documents Annexure C-1 & Annexure C-2 and closed the evidence.

3.              We have heard the complainant in person.  He reiterated the contents of the complaint.  He submitted that he deposited his mobile handset with OP no. 2 the service centre of OP no. 3 for repair.  He visited several times to the office of OP no. 2 to get back his mobile handset during repair, but the OP no. 2 failed to repair his mobile handset duly repaired.

4.              The complainant purchased his mobile handset of Rs. 7,000/- vide bill dated 05.11.2013 Annexure C-2 and deposited his handset with OP no. 2 vide job sheet dated 24.07.2014 Annexure C1.  The Ops did not bother to appear and contest the claim of the complainant.  The evidence adduced by the complainant goes unrebutted.  In these circumstances, the complaint of the complainant succeeds.  We partly allow the complaint of the complainant and direct the Ops no. 2 & 3 to pay Rs. 7,000/- to the complainant within 30 days from the date of passing of this order. Certified copies of the order be sent to the parties free of costs.  File be consigned to the record room, after due compliance.

Announced in open Forum.

Dated: 15.12.2015.                                         (Rajesh Jindal)

                                                                            President,  

                                                                 District Consumer Disputes

                                                                 Redressal Forum, Bhiwani.

(Ansuya Bishnoi),            (Balraj Singh),     

Member.                          Member.