BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-I, U.T. CHANDIGARH

========

Munish Chaudhary s/o Sh.Jagdish Chaudhary r/o #2850, Sector 15, Chandigarh

…..Complainant

                           V E R S U S

Sony Ericsson Company Store, SCO 49-51, Sector 17-C, Chandigarh.

2.  Mr.Vikram, Manager, Sony Ericsson RT Chandigarh, SCO 23, Sector 18-D, Chandigarh.

3.  R.K. Outsourcing Services Limited, D-1/3, Okhla Industrial Area, Phase II,New Delhi - 110020

                                  ……Opposite Parties

CORAM:  SH.JAGROOP SINGH MAHAL PRESIDENT

              DR.(MRS) MADHU BEHL       MEMBER

              SH.RAJINDER SINGH GILL    MEMBER

Argued by: Complainant in person.

 OPs exparte.

PER DR.(MRS) MADHU BEHL,  MEMBER

             Succinctly put, the complainant on 3.06.2009 purchased a Sony Ericsson Mobile from OP-1 for a sum of Rs.15,800/- which carried a warranty of one year from the date when it was purchased. After four to five months the touch screen of the said mobile stopped working for which he approached OP-1 several times but was of no use at all. He then approached OP-2 (Manager of the registered workshop of OP-1) and handed over the said mobile for the repair of touch screen. On 14.12.2009, when he visited the office of OP-2 to collect his mobile, some other old mobile phone of same model and colour which was in damaged condition and was completely different in appearance was given to him by OP-2. The complainant compared the IMEI No. of the mobile phone with the original bill and found that the set which was handed over to him by OP-2 was having a different IMEI No. When he asked OP-2 for his original mobile phone, he was forced out of the workshop without the delivery of his original mobile phone. On 21.12.2009, he sent a legal notice to OP-1 and OP-2 but till date no action in this regard has been taken by them.  Hence this complaint alleging that the aforesaid acts of the OPs amount to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice.

2.             Notice was served to the OPs. OPs appeared and sought time to file reply and evidence.  After that none appeared on behalf of the OPs.  Accordingly they were proceeded ex-parte. 

3.             The complainant led evidence in support of his contention.

4.             We have heard the complainant in person and have also perused the record. 

5.             The contention of the complainant that on 3.06.2009 he purchased a Sony Ericssion Mobile bearing Model No.K850 bearing IEMI No.351829020031917 for a sum of Rs.15,800/- is proved from OP-1. According to him it started giving problems after its purchase.  Annexure C-1 shows that the above said mobile set is under warranty for a period of one year from 3.06.2009 to 2.06.2010.  Annexure C-2 and Annexure C-3 show that on 24.11.2009 the complainant took the above said mobile set to the service centre of OP-1 for necessary repairs. It is his grouse that when he visited the service centre Mr.Vikram (Manager of the registered workshop of OP-1) mischievously tried to give some other mobile phone of same model and colour, which was in damaged condition and was also completely different than that of the original mobile phone of the complainant which was deposited by him for its repairs and when the complainant asked for his original mobile set from Mr.Vikram, he bluntly refused to give the original mobile phone and also threatened him to do anything he deemed fit. The complainant again called customer care helpline of Sony Ericsson and registered a complaint bearing ID No.86042838 and the OPs assured the complainant that the original mobile phone would be returned after four days but nothing positive has come out.

6.             In view of the above discussion, we are of the opinion that the complainant has proved his case by way of documentary evidence placed on record.  Therefore in these circumstances, we accept the complaint and hold the OPs deficient in rendering proper service and adopting unfair trade practice.  Accordingly we direct the OPs to rectify the defects in the above said Sony Ericssion Mobile bearing Model No.K850 bearing IEMI NO.351829020031917 and deliver it to the complainant after carrying out necessary repairs making it fully functional to the satisfaction of the complainant without charging anything and if the set is found to be non repairable in that eventuality, the cost price of the mobile phone i.e. Rs.15,800/- shall be paid to the complainant. The OPs shall also pay Rs.1100/-as costs of litigation. The order shall be complied within 15 days from the date of receipt of the copy of this order failing which OPs would be liable to pay the same alongwith penal interest @12% p.a. since the filing of the present complaint i.e. 25.01.2010, till its payment to the complainant.

              Certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge.  The file be consigned.