DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, JHARSUGUDA

                           CONSUMER  COMPLAINT  CASE NO. 13 OF 2016

Manish Patel,

S/O: Binay Patel,

R/O: C/O- Shovesh Chandra Tripathy,

Near Post Office, Sarbahal,

PO/PS/ Dist: Jharsuguda, Odisha...……..…………..……..………. Complainant.

                                           Versus 

1. SMART Services ( Telecom Division),

ISO (9001-2008) Certificate Company SCR-15/E(666),

Bapuji Nagar, Bhubaneswar-751 009.

Phone No. 0674-2597929,

Whatapp No. 9778431133.

2. FlipKart,

WS Retail Services Pvt. Ltd.,

No. 42/1 & 43 Kacherakanahalli Village,

Jadigenahalli Hobli Hoskote Taluk, Bangalor,

Karnataka, India- 560 067.

3. Motorola Solutions India,

Motorola Excellence Centre,

415/2, Mehrauli, Gurgaon Road,

Sector-14, Near Maharana Pratap Chowk,

Harayana- 122 001, Phone No. 01244192000.......................... Opp. Parties.

Counsel for the Parties:-

For the Complainant                               Self.

For the Opp. Party No.1                        None( Ex-Parte).

For the Opp. Party No.2                        Shri B.P.Sarangi, Adv. & Associates.

For the Opp. Party No. 3                       Self( Ex-Parte).

Date of Order: 08.08.2016

Present   

                                             1. Shri S.L. Behera, President.

                                             2. Shri  S.K.Ojha, Member.

Shri S.L. Behera, President: - The complainant’s case in brief is that, he had purchased one mobile handset having model Moto-G (3^rd Generation) by paying- ₹11,699/- only from the O.P.No.2 through online by making online order bearing Order No. OD303588069254612200 dtd.08.08.2015. After 40 days of purchasing the said mobile got problem on auto starting. The O.P.No.3 is the Customer Care Centre and the O.P.No.1 is the authorized Service Centre of the said hand set.  The said hand set started showing defects while operating.  The complainant informed and submitted the hand set before the O.P.No.1 for repairing and received within one month.  The hand set again started defects and the complainant again submitted to the O.P.No.1 for repairing and contracted the O.P.No.3 through toll free no.-18001022344 from where he got assured many times for delivery of his mobile hand set but till date the complainant did not receive his said mobile hand set, hence this case.

            After being noticed through this Forum, the O.P.No.2 appeared before this Forum, filed their written statement but the O.P.No.1 and O.P.No.3 failed to either appear or filing his written version and ultimately stand ex-parte. The O.P.No.2 denied the allegations of the complainant and submitted that they sells the products of other manufacturers and traders under their respective trade marks through the website. The product was delivered at the complainant and the warranty / guarantee and after sale services are provided by the manufacturers with denying all the allegations made by the complainant and prayed for dismissal of the case.

Heard the matter in length and on perusal of case record including materials available, it is noted that the complainant has purchased one mobile handset  having model Moto-G (3^rd Generation) by paying ₹ 11,699/- only from the O.P.No.2 through online by making online order bearing Order No. OD303588069254612200 dtd.08.08.2015. The O.P.No.1 is the authorized Service Centre and O.P.No.3 is the Customer Care Centre.  After being defect the complainant deposited the said mobile before the O.P.No.1 but after few days the same problem started again.  The complainant again submitted his said mobile to the O.P.No.1 but till date he yet to receive.  The complainant contacted with the O.P.No.3 from where he received only assurances.  

It is the O.P.No.2 from which the complainant has purchased the said mobile hand set by being fully convinced with the price and features of the product and paid the full and final consideration amount of Rs.11,699/- only.  The O.P.No.2 is the dealer of products who deals with various kinds of consumer durable items of various brands and performing trading business through online. Here at the time of purchasing a consumer convinced with the trader / seller and purchases as per his choice so also if any defect occurs then the said trader should also make proper arrangement to remove the defect of the product but here in this case the O.P.No.2 brushed out it’s hands from the responsibility.  

            In view of above observations and analysis, the activities of O.P No. 2 found to be committing of deficiency in service towards complainant, hence we are inclined to allow the complaint petition with directions in form of order as follows :

ORDER

The O.P.No.2 is hereby directed to give a new defect free mobile handset in place of old defected handset of equivalent price of ₹11,699/- only or refund ₹11,699/-(Rupees eleven thousand six hundred ninety nine) only to the complainant along with pay a sum of ₹ 1,000/- (Rupees one thousand) only towards harassment, mental agony including litigation cost within 30(thirty) days from the date of receiving of this order.

Accordingly the case is disposed of.

Order pronounced in the open court today on this the 08^th of August, 2016, copy of this order shall be communicated to the parties as per Rule.

                                                                      I Agree.        

                                                                    S.K.Ojha, Member                S.L.Behera, President                                                                                                                                 

                                                Dictated and corrected by me.

                                                      S.L.Behera, President