DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM: BHADRAK
Dated the 30th day of January, 2019
C.D Case No. 97 of 2016
Present 1. Shri Raghunath Kar, President
2. Shri Basanta Kumar Mallick, Member
3. Afsara Begum, Member
Smt. Srimayee Dixit
W/o: Guruprasad Mishra,
Vill: Bankasahi,
Po: Bhadrak,
Ps: Bhadrak (T),
Dist: Bhadrak
……………………. Complainant
(Versus)
1. Sri Dhabaleswar Panda
Proprietor, Monorama Communications,
Vill: Samaraipur (Near Neheru Stadium),
Po/Ps/Dist: Bhadrak
2. M/s P.N Services (Micromax Service Center)
At: Nayabazar,
Po/Dist: Bhadrak
3. The Regional Manager
MICROMAX INFORMATIONS Ltd.,
At: Netaji Nagar “E” Block,
PO: Ganganagar,
Madhyamgram, Kolkatta,
West Bengal- 700132
…………………………..Opp. Parties
Counsel For Complainant: Mr. A.K. Chand, Adv and Mr. K.C. Behuria, Adv
Counsel For the OP: None
Date of hearing: 09.04.2018
Date of order: 30.01.2019
BASANTA KUMAR MALLICK, MEMBER
This dispute arises out of a complaint filed by the complainant alleging deficiency of service and unfair trade practice.
The facts of the complaint are to the effect that the complainant purchased one Micromax cell phone of Model No- MMX Q392 from OP No. 1, who deals with selling of mobile phones, for a sum consideration of Rs 8,800/- on 06.10.2015. OP No. 1 also issued a money receipt for the sum received along with warranty card which contains the warranty conditions and according to conditions No- 2, the warranty is valid for complete 12 months commencing from the date of sale. The complainant used the said cell phone for a period of six months without any defects but the defect cropped up in the last week of March, 2016 as the phone itself got switched off very frequently and automatically causing inconvenience for the user/complainant. The complainant immediately rushed to OP No. 2 (the Micromax Authorized Service Centre) and narrated the defects he has noticed/observed and left the mobile on 03.04.2016 by the instruction of service centre in-charge for repairing and also obtained Job card duly signed by OP No. 2. The OP No. 2 delivered the mobile after repairing on 10.04.2016. But a day after receiving the repaired mobile, the recurrence of earlier defects were also observed and noticed. Once again the complainant submitted the mobile to OP No. 2 for correction and repairing of defects which was kept with the said OP for nearly one month. While handing over the said mobile, OP No. 2 informed the complainant about replacement of mother board? On 19.05.2016 the complainant observed multifarious defects in the mobile and immediately handed over the mobile to OP No. 2 and narrated the defects and requested for replacement of the defective mobile with new one as the warranty period was in force, but OP No. 2 kept the mobile for another month and returned back the said mobile after replacing the mother board once again and in spite of frequent repairing the said mobile did not function at all. The complainant has, time and again, requested the appropriate authority for replacement of the mobile with new one as the problems were cropped up due to manufacturing defects. Despite repeated requests and persuasions, O.Ps turned a deaf ear to the grievances of the complainant which amounts to deficiency of service and unfair trade practice. When the O.Ps did not respond to the complainant, finding no alternative, other than to file this dispute requesting a direction to O.Ps for replacement of old defective mobile with new one of the same model along with cost and compensation.
All though O.Ps were served notice from the Forum for their appearance and submission of written version, none of them appeared before the Forum nor they felt it wise even to submit written version. OP No. 1 and two are operating their business within the Bhadrak Municipal limit, covering half K.M from this Forum but did not appear before the Forum for the reason best known to them. Hence it is presumed that the O.Ps had no mind to appear before the Forum nor they did care for the proceedings. Awaiting for a period of six months all O.Ps were set ex-parte on 15.04.2017 and ex-parte hearing was taken up on 09.04.2018 for final disposal of the case. On perusal of facts narrated in the complaint and the material evidence available on record it is opined by the Forum that the O.Ps have intentionally and deliberately neglected in attending the Forum which leads to believe that the O.Ps have admitted the points of allegation made by the complainant and therefore O.Ps are liable to make good of the loss sustained by the complainant and to replace the defective mobile set with new one. Hence it is ordered;
ORDER
The complaint be and the same is allowed against all the O.Ps with cost & compensation. OP No. 1 is directed to provide a brand new handset (Mobile) of the same brand and model or pay a sum of Rs 8,800/- along with Rs 3,000/- as compensation and Rs 2,000/- as cost of litigation which must be reimbursed by OP No. 3 at the later stage. This order must be complied by concerned O.Ps within 30 days from the date of issue of this order failing which interest @ 12% shall be charged on the awarded amount excluding litigation cost from date of filing of the case till the date of payment of awarded amount.
This order is pronounced in the open Forum on this day of 30th January, 2019 under my hand and seal of the Forum.
