BEFORE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BHIWNI.

                                                                      Complaint No. 171 of 2015.

                                                                      Date of Instt: 10.6.2015.

                                                                      Date of Order: 19.8.2015.

Nitin Sangwan son of Shri Gunpal Singh, resident of village Kalali, tehsil Charkhi Dadri district Bhiwani.

 ….…. Complainant

                              Versus

1. Jai Shree Ram Mobile, 1^st Floor, Near Bus Stand, Near Bank of India, Charkhi Dadri, district Bhiwani, through its Prop(Authorized Karbon Mobile Service Centre).
2. Manager/Director, Karbon Mobile Office, Head Office: D-170, Okhla, Industrial Area, Phase-1, New Delhi.

                                                                   …….Respondents.

               COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 12 OF THE

               CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, 1986.

Before:         Shri Balraj Singh, Member,

                    Smt. Ansuya Bishnoi, Member,

Present:   Complainant in person with Shri Vijender Khichi Adv.

                Respondents ex parte.

BALRAJ SINGH, MEMBER:         

ORDER

                    In brief, the grievance of the complainant is that he had purchased one Handset of Carbon Company for a sum of Rs.5800/- vide bill No.787 dated 5.10.2014. It is alleged that soon after purchase the Hand Set became defective within warranty period and complaint was lodged with the respondents. The complainant visited the service centre of respondent company several times and requested to repair the same but it flatly refused to do the needful. Hence the complainant was deprived of use of the Hand Set and suffered a loss. Now the complainant has claimed the replacement of the Hand Set along with compensation and costs by way of filing present complainant.

2.                Despite service, respondents did not appear, hence they were proceeded against ex parte vide order dated 18.8.2015.

3.                The complainant has filed his duly sworn affidavit in his evidence to prove his respective version. 

4.                 We have heard the complainant at length.

5.                 Complainant has argued that he had purchased the hand set for a sum of Rs.5800/-. A perusal of Photostat copy of bill, Annexure C1 and Annexure C2 Photo stat copy of Job Sheet reveals that the Hand Set of the complainant became out of order within warranty period. The version of the complainant is supported by an affidavit. The surrounding circumstances also suggest that the Hand Set suffers from manufacturing defect for which respondents are liable.  The respondents have failed to rebut the version of complainant and even failed to appear to controvert the stand taken by complainant which has been supported by an affidavit.  Keeping in view the facts and circumstances mentioned above, the complaint of the complainant is accepted with costs and respondents are directed:-

1.       To refund the original cost of the Hand Set along with interest @ 12 % per annum from the date of filing of this complaint till its final realization.

          2.       To pay Rs. 2200/- as litigation charges.

                    The compliance of the order be made within 45 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order.  Certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of costs.  File be consigned to the record room, after due compliance.

Announced in open Forum.

Dated: 19.8.2015.                                        

       (Ansuya Bishnoi)                                        (Balraj Singh)

             Member.                                                       Member

  District Consumer Disputes                  District Consumer Disputes

  Redressal Forum, Bhiwani.                   Redressal Forum, Bhiwani.