Delhi

North West

CC/128/2015

Mohit Popli - Complainant(s)

Versus

SMART MOBILE TOTAL SOLUTION - Opp.Party(s)

20 Dec 2016

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM : NORTH-WEST

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

CSC-BLOCK-C, POCKET-C, SHALIMAR BAGH, DELHI-110088

 

CC No: 128/2015

D.No._________                                                                            Dated: ____________

 

                     

In the matter of:

 

 

MOHIT POPLI, 

R/o FLAT NO-142, JAI APARTMENTS,

SECTOR-9, ROHINI, DELHI-.                                                           … COMPLAINANT

 

                Versus

1. THE MANAGER/PROP./OWNER,

    M/s SMART MOBILE TOTAL SOLUTIONS,

    HEAD OFFICE: C-2/16, YAMUNA VIHAR,

    DELHI-110053.

    ALSO AT:

    REGD. OFFICE-89, BAGCHI MADHO DASS,

    OPP. LAJPAT RAI MARKET, DELHI-06.

 

2. THE MANAGER

    BANSAL TELECOMS,

    G-2, RG COMPLEX, COMMUNITY CENTRE,

    SECTOR-8, ROHINI, DELHI-110085.                                   … OPPOSITE PARTY(ies)

 

 

 

 

CORAM : SH. M.K. GUPTA, PRESIDENT

               SH. BARIQ AHMED, MEMBER

     MS. USHA KHANNA, MEMBER  

 

 

                                                                         Date of Institution: 22.01.2015

                                                                                  Date of decision: 20.12.2016

 

SH. M.K. GUPTA, PRESIDENT

 

 

ORDER

 

1.  The present complaint has been filed under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, against the OP on the allegations that the complainant purchased a Samsung Mobile Note 2 on 27.03.2014 for Rs.27,800/- from OP-2. On the suggestion of OP-2, the handset was insured with OP-1 on 27.03.2014 for period of 2 years from the date of purchase vide a mobile protection plan of OP-1 and service plan amount of Rs.2,780/- was paid to the OP-2. The complainant further alleged that on 27.12.2014 the touch screen of the handset started giving problems. A call was made to OP-1 on customer care number mentioned in the protection plan agreement. On 29.12.2014 an executive of OP-1 visited the address of the complainant and stated that there is a minor’s spot on the touch and it will get replace under the protection plan and at the same time the executive took the handset for replacement of touch/display and issued a job sheet vide slip no-12696 but in violation of clause 12 (c) of the protection plan did not provide the standby handset. Despite repeated request of the complainant, the OP gave the assurance that the handset will be repaired till 10^th Jan-2015 as the handset is in the Samsung Service Center and after that OP informed that the handset will be delivered till 12^th Jan-2015. At the last, Mr. Deepak Saini, an executive of OP-1 visited the residence of the complainant and gave the handset but on checking the same the upper body of the mobile handset was found totally damaged due to mishandling by the OP-1 and the IMEI No of the handset was changed, though the back side sticker of the mobile set was the same, as the complainant in front of the executive of the OP-1 dialed the number *#06# but it showed different IMEI no. The complainant also started facing new problems like automatic re-start and heating problems. The executive of OP-1 started forcing the complainant to sign the service job sheet but the complainant refused as all the original parts of the mobile handset including motherboard have been changed. Thereafter the executive of OP-1 started using abusive language with the complainant at his residence. Immediately, the incident was reported to the Local Police Station at number 100 and both i.e. the complainant and the executive were taken to P.S., Prashant Vihar, Delhi where in presence of their Senior Executive, Mr. Deepak Saini admitted that internal parts including mother board have been changed with the defective one and the upper front side chrome body has been broken due to mishandling and this fact was admitted by Mr. Mohit Jain, Manager/Owner/Prop. of OP-1 over telephone through his mobile number 9818104512. OP-1 has taken back the handset in the Police Station itself and promised that the duly repaired handset with original parts shall be delivered on or before 17.01.2015 as per compromise which was taken place in the Police Station. On 17.01.2015, complainant did not received any call from OP-1 and on calling Mr. Deepak Saini, the executive and Sh. Mohit Jain of OP-1, there was no response and it was told that the complainant has to accept the handset with the same duplicate and defective parts. OP-2 has promoted the OP-1 by selling the protection plan of OP-1 after charging 10 % of the value of the handset. On 19.01.2015, the complainant again called the executive of OP-1 and they clearly refused to delivered the handset with original parts.   

2.  On these allegations the complainant has filed the complaint praying for refund of cost of Rs.27,800/- plus Rs.2,780/- and has also sought compensation of Rs.30,000/- for causing mental agony and harassment and has also sought Rs.7,000/- towards cost of litigation.

3. Notice was issued to Opposite Party through speed post for appearance and the notices were received by the OPs on 02.02.2015 and 31.01.2015 respectively as per delivery certificate issued by the Post Master, HSG-1, Rohini, Sec-7, P.O. But none for OPs appeared and as such both the OPs were proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 21.08.2015.

4.  In order to prove his case the complainant filed his affidavit in evidence and placed on record copy of invoice of Rs.27,800/- for purchase of handset issued by OP-2 and copy of mobile phone protection plan/policy receipt of Rs.2,780/- dated 27.03.2014 which was issued by the OP-2 on behalf of OP-1 for the period from 27.03.2014 to 26.03.2016.

5.  The case of the complainant has remained consistent and undoubted. There is nothing on record to disbelieve the case of the complainant. Accordingly both the OPs are held guilty of unfair trade practice and deficiency in service.

     Accordingly, both the OPs jointly or severally are directed as under:

a)   To refund to the complainant the amount of Rs. 27,800/- being the cost of the handset and Rs.2,780/- charge for mobile protection plan/policy.

b)  To pay an amount of Rs.5,000/- as compensation towards mental agony harassment to the complainant.

(c ) to pay an amount of Rs.3,000/- as litigation cost.

6. The above amount shall be paid by the OPs to the complainant within 30 days from the date of this order failing which OPs shall be liable to pay interest on the entire awarded amount @ 10% per annum from the date of this order till the date of payment.  If OPs fail to comply with the order within 30 days, the complainant may approach this Forum u/s 27 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

 7. Let a copy of this order be sent to each party free of cost as per regulation 21 of the Consumer Protection Regulations, 2005. Thereafter file be consigned to record room.

     Announced on this 20^th December, 2016.

 

 

 

 

    BARIQ AHMED                              USHA KHANNA                                 M.K. GUPTA

      (MEMBER)                                    (MEMBER)                                    (PRESIDENT)