IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ALAPPUZHA
Thursday the 30th day of June, 2016
Filed on 24.08.2015
Present
- Smt. Elizabeth George (President)
- Sri. Antony Xavier (Member)
- Smt. Jasmine D (Member)
in
C.C.No. 254/2015
between
Complainant:- Opposite Parties:-
Sri. Gopakumar 1. Sonic Systems, Pulimoottil
Sreerangam Trade Centre, Mullackal
Thanneermukkom P.O. Alappuzha – 688 011
Cherthala Represented by its Manager
Now residing at Sreesylam
Mararikkulam, Alappuzha 2. Lava International Ltd.
Pin – 688 522 A-58 Sector 64, Noida –
(By Adv. Pramod) 201 301, Uttar Pradesh
O R D E R
SMT. JASMINE D. (MEMBER)
The case of the complainant in short is as follows:-
The complainant had purchased a mobile phone manufactured by the 2nd opposite party for an amount of Rs.11,500/-. After the warranty period the phone became defective and entrusted to the first opposite party for repairing and complainant paid an amount of Rs.600/- towards repairing charges. The opposite party returned the phone after repair, but the hand set showing some other problems. According to the complainant there was no such defect when he entrusted the phone for repairing. When the complainant questioned the same, the 2nd opposite party agreed to repair the product and the complainant entrusted the phone to the first opposite party on 31.12.2014, but the product has not been repaired or replaced so far, the complainant sustained much mental agony and hence filed this complaint.
2. Notices were served to the opposite parties, they appeared before the forum, but not filed any version.
3. The evidence in this case consists of the complainant filed proof affidavit and documents produced which were marked as Exts.A1 to A4. The mobile phone cover and charger produced before this Forum which is marked as MO1.
4. Considering the allegations of the complainant, the Forum has raised the following issues:-
1) Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties?
2) Whether the complainant is entitled to get the reliefs as prayed for?
5. Points 1 and 2:- The case of the complainant is that the complainant purchased a mobile phone manufactured by the 2nd opposite party for an amount of Rs.11,500/-. After the warranty period the phone became defective and entrusted to the first opposite party for repairing and paid an amount of Rs.600/- towards repairing charges. The first opposite party returned the mobile phone after repairing. Thereafter the complainant noticed that the display of the hand set is not working properly and also it was not fixed properly and also noted some other problems. According to the complainant there was no such defect when he entrusted the phone to the first opposite party for repairing. When the complainant questioned the same the first opposite party he agreed either to repair it or to replace the phone and complainant entrusted the phone to the first opposite party on 31.12.2014. But so far the product has not been returned. The complainant sustained much mental agony and hence filed this complaint.
5. The complainant filed proof affidavit and produced 4 documents which were marked as Exts.A1 to A4. Ext.A1 is the job sheet dated 10.12.2014. On Ext.A1 the problem reported is soft ware update. According to the complainant after repairing, the set was returned and the complainant paid an amount of Rs.600/- towards repairing charges which is evidenced from
Ext.A3. Thereafter the complainant noticed that the display of the hand set is not working properly and also it was not fixed properly, and also noted some other problems. The complainant informed the first opposite party that there was no such problem at the time of entrusting the phone to the first opposite party for repairing. First opposite party agreed to repair the same and the complainant entrusted the phone to the first opposite party on 31.12.2014. Thereafter the complainant contacted the first opposite party many times for getting it repaired and the first opposite party informed that it can’t be repaired and agreed to replace the phone, but so far the set has not been repaired or replaced. From Ext A2 it can be seen that the product is entrusted to the 1st opposite party. Since they have not returned the set so far, the opposite parties have committed deficiency in service. Even though the opposite parties appeared before the Forum and agreed to settle the matter, but the matter has not been settled. Therefore the interference of this Forum is highly necessary in this stage and the complaint is allowed.
In result, the complaint is allowed. The opposite parties 1 and 2 are jointly and severally directed to repair the phone to the satisfaction of the complainant free of cost and return the same to the complainant within one month from the date of receipt of this order. Failing which athe opposite parties are directed to replace the phone with a new one of the same model or same price. The opposite parties are further directed to pay an amount of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees two thousand only) towards compensation for mental agony and inconvenience caused to the complainant and Rs.1,000/- (Rupees one thousand only) towards costs of the proceedings to the complainant.
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant transcribed by her corrected by me and pronounced in open Forum on this the 30th day of June, 2016.
Sd/- Smt. Jasmine D (Member)
Sd/- Smt. Elizabeth George (President)
Sd/- Sri. Antony Xavier (Member)
Appendix:-
Evidence of the complainant:-
Ext. A1 - Copy of the job sheet dated 10.12.2014
Ext. A2 - Copy of the job sheet dated 31.12.2014
Ext.A3 - Copy of the receipt dated 29.12.2014
Ext.A4 - Copy of the bill for Rs.11,550/-
MO1 - Charger and Mobile phone cover
Evidence of the opposite parties:- Nil
// True Copy //
By Order
Senior Superintendent
To
Complainant/Opposite party/S.F.
Typed by:- pr/-
Compared by:-
