Delhi

West Delhi

CC/16/413

RAKESH - Complainant(s)

Versus

SHUBHAM TELECOM - Opp.Party(s)

07 Nov 2016

ORDER

CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM (WEST)

GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI

150-151, Community Centre, C-Block, JanakPuri, New Delhi – 110058

 

                                                                                                             Date of institution21.6.16

CC NO-413/16                                                                                                                    Date of Order:7.11.16

 

In the matter of

 

Rakesh Meena,

R/o D2B- 503,

Golf Course Road,

Sector-18B,Dwarka,

New Delhi-78.                                                                                             COMPLAINANT

 

VERSUS

Sarna Communications,

D-169, Shop No.4,

Fateh Nagar, Jail Road,

New Delhi-18.                                                                                             OPPOSITE PARTY-1

 

Shubham Telecom,

Plot No.C-4/288,

Vaishali Sector-4,

Behind Vaishali Metro Station,

Ghaziabad-201010.                                                                                  OPPOSITE PARTY-2

 

ORDER

R.S. BAGRI, PRESIDENT

            The  brief facts necessary for the disposal of the present complaint as stated are that the complainant on 14.1.15 purchased one mobile handset Carbon S12 Delight IMEI No.91130S40339S941  for sale consideration of Rs.4,500/- vide invoice No.2830 dated 14.1.15 from Opposite Party-1.  The mobile handset developed fault within warranty and was deposited for repairs with service center Opposite Party-2 . When the complainant visited Opposite Party-2 to know status of the mobile handset,  the Opposite Party-2 told the complainant to come after 15 days.  But despite several visits by the complainant the mobile handset is neither repaired by the Opposite Party nor returned.   Hence, the present complaint for directions to the Opposite Parties to replace his mobile handset with lattest version and to pay Rs.25,000/- compensation for mental pain, agony and harassment.

 

            Notice of the complaint  was sent to the Opposite Parties.  But none appeared on their behalf.   The Opposite Parties were proceeded against exparte vide order dated 10.8.16. 

 

            When the complainant was asked to lead exparte evidence, he filed affidavit dated 18.10.16 and relied upon invoice number 2830 dated 14.1.15 and job sheet No.KJASPUP444215K1351 dated 27. 2.15.   He has reiterated the facts of the complaint once again in the affidavit .  He deposed that the mobile handset was given for repairs to Opposite Party-2 within warranty.  But the same was neither repaired nor returned till today. 

 

            On perusal of the documents, it reveals that the complainant purchased one mobile handset Carbon S12 Delight IMEI No.91130S40339S941  for sale consideration of Rs.4,500/- vide invoice No.2830 dated 14.1.15 from Opposite Party-1.  The mobile handset developed fault within warranty and was deposited for repairs with service center Opposite Party-2  vide job sheet No.KJASPUP444215K1351 dated 27. 2.15.   The mobile handset is neither repaired nor returned till today.   The Opposite Party-2 is competent to replace and repair the mobile handset.   

 

            We have heard the complainant in person and have gone through the material on record carefully and thoroughly.  

 

            The version of the complainant  has remained unrebutted and unchallenged.  Therefore, there is no reason to disbelieve the unrebutted and unchallenged evidence produced by him. The complainant from the urebutted and unchallenged version  has been able to show that one mobile handset Carbon S12 Delight IMEI No.91130S40339S941  for sale consideration of Rs.4,500/- vide invoice No.2830 dated 14.1.15 was purchased by the complainant  from Opposite Party-1.  The mobile handset developed fault and was given for repairs to op-2 vide job sheet No.KJASPUP444215K1351 dated 27. 2.15.   The Opposite Party-2 failed to repair the mobile handset and same is not returned till today.   The complainant  has suffered loss of use of mobile handset and also suffered pain, agony and harassment.  The Opposite Party-2 is authorized to repair and replace the mobile handset.    Therefore, we are of the opinion that the complainant  is entitled for replacement of the mobile handset with a brand new mobile handset of same model or upgraded model of same make alongwith compensation for mental pain, agony and harassment.  

 

            In the light of above discussion and observations, the complaint succeeds and is hereby allowed.  Therefore, we direct Opposite Party-2 to replace the mobile handset with a new mobile handset of same make and model or upgraded model of same make and pay Rs.1000/- as compensation for mental pain, agony, harassment  and litigation expenses. 

 

            Order pronounced on   :7.11.16

·        Compliance of the order be made within 30 days after receipt of the order.

·        Copy of order be sent to the concerned parties free of cost.

·        Thereafter, file be  consigned to record.

 

 

(PUNEET LAMBA)                          (URMILA GUPTA)              ( R.S.  BAGRI )

  MEMBER                                         MEMBER                            PRESIDENT