Delhi

West Delhi

CC/14/733

Lalita - Complainant(s)

Versus

Smart Shoppe - Opp.Party(s)

17 Nov 2014

ORDER

 CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM (WEST)

GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI

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

 

                                                                                                       Dt. of institution         : 10.11.2014

 

Case. No. D.F-III/733/2014                                                                            Date of order             :  03.02.2016

In the matter of :-

Mrs. Lalita

312,Baba Faridpuri,

West Patel Nagar,

New Delhi-110008                                                                                                Complainant

Vs.

1.        Smart Shoppee

            C-111, West Patel Nagar,

            New Delhi-110008.                                                                                   OP-1

 

2.        Home Serve (Insurance Company),

            114, Westerned Mall,

            District Centre, Janak Puri,

            New Delhi-110058.                                                                                   OP-2

 

3.        Paladin System Pvt. Ltd.,

            27/5, Ashok Nagar Double Storey,

            Near Jail Road, Tilak Nagar,

            New Delhi-110008.                                                                                   OP-3

 

  (R.S. BAGRI, PRESIDENT)

O R D E R  

            The complainant Mrs. Lalita has filed the present complaint with averments that she bought one mobile handset Intex Aqua Curve for sale consideration of Rs. 12,000/- from Smart Shoppee Opposite Party No.1 on 8.4.14.  On the same day she purchased insurance plan for the said mobile  handset from Opposite Party No.3 on payment of Rs. 1,200/-.

 

-2-

            The screen of mobile phone was broken on 10.8.14 and it was informed to Opposite Party No.3 on the same day.   Engineer of Opposite Party No.3 picked up the mobile handset from the house of complainant after 15 days.   He issued job sheet No. 4001 and told the complainant that the mobile set will be repaired and delivered at the residence of the complainant after 15 days.  But she did not receive the mobile handset within the stipulated period of 15 days.  Therefore, she approached Opposite Party No.3 to return the repaired mobile set.   Opposite Party No.3 assured that after 5-7 days same will be repaired.   The complainant after wait of 10 days inquired status of her mobile set.    But the Opposite Party No.3 on one pretext or other put off the matter .   The Opposite Party No.3 did not return the mobile handset.

 

            Hence, the complaint for directions to Opposite Parties to return the mobile handset after rectification or pay  the price of the handset  and adequate compensation for mental pain, agony and harassment.

 

            Notice of the complaint was sent to opposite parties.   But despite service none appeared on behalf of opposite parties.   Therefore, the complainant was asked to lead ex-parte evidence vide order dated 3.8.15.

           

            When the complainant was asked to lead ex-parte evidence and produce documents in support of her claim, she submitted her affidavit dated 12.9.15 with photo copies of invoice  No. A 048 dated 8.4.14, insurance cover note i.e. protection  plan  dated  8.4.14  and  job  sheet  No. 4001 dated   25.8.14.   The

 

-3-

complainant in her affidavit has narrated the facts of the complaint  and deposed that mobile handset  was insured with Opposite Party No.3 for repairs “pick up and return facility”.    The official of Opposite Party No.2 collected the mobile handset of complainant on 25.8.14 but till date did not return the mobile handset.

 

            From the perusal of the documents relied upon by the complainant, it reveal that the complainant purchased the mobile handset Intex Aqua Curve vide invoice  dated 8.4.14 for sale consideration of Rs. 12,000/-.   She insured her mobile handset for repairs,  “pick up and return facility” with Opposite Party No.3.  It was observed during the perusal of documents that mobile handset was covered  for all purposes under Paladin Protection Plan given by Opposite Party No.3 i.e Paladin System Pvt. Ltd. Which gives such scheme under the brand name home serve.    The mobile handset was picked up by the officials of Opposite Party No.3 on 25.8.14 for repair.  But till today the mobile handset is not returned .   The complainant has suffered loss of mobile handset and also deprived of right to use the mobile handset.   She suffered harassment, mental agony and pain.

 

            We have heard Mrs. Lalita, complainant in person and gone through the complaint, affidavit dated 12.9.15 and documents  relied upon by her carefully and thoroughly.

 

 

-4-

            The version of the complainant has remained un-rebutted and un-challenged.    There is no reason to disbelieve the affidavit of the complainant and documents relied upon by her.    The complainant from the affidavit and documents relied upon by her has been able to show that she purchased the mobile handset for Rs. 12,000/- on 8.4.14.   She also purchased protection plan from Opposite Party No.3 for “repair, pick up and return facility” .  The mobile developed defects within the covered period  under protection plan.   But the mobile set is not repaired and returned  till today.

 

            Therefore, the complainant suffered  loss of Rs. 12,000/- cost of mobile handset.   The complainant also paid amount of Rs. 1200/- to Opposite Party No.3 for covering her mobile  phone under protection plan so total cost of the cell phone including protection plan comes to Rs.13,200/-.   She has suffered mental pain and deprived of using her mobile phone for almost one year.   Therefore, there is deficiency of service on the part of opposite parties.  The complainant is also entitled for compensation of 16,800/- on account of mental pain and harassment suffered by her and loss of use of mobile in question.

 

            In the light of above discussion and observations, the Opposite Parties are directed to pay a sum of Rs. 13,200/- the cost of mobile phone and cost of protection plan with interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of filing of the complaint with compensation of Rs. 16,800/- for mental pain, agony, harassment and loss

 

 

 

-5-

of use of mobile phone for almost of one year.   She is also entitled for litigation expenses of Rs. 1100/-.   The opposite parties are jointly and severally liable to pay the amounts.

 

Order pronounced on   :

• Compliance of the order be made within the 30 days after receive of the order.
• Copy of order be sent to the concerned parties free of cost.
• Thereafter, file be  consigned to record.

 

 

 

 

(PUNEET LAMBA)                                                               ( R.S.  BAGRI )

      MEMBER                                                                          PRESIDENT