Orissa

Rayagada

CC/45/2014

Sri Raj Kumar Mohana - Complainant(s)

Versus

Sri Mobil World, and others - Opp.Party(s)

Self

20 Jun 2014

ORDER

DISTRICT   CONSUMER  DISPUTES REDRESSAL    FORUM, RAYAGADA

AT:  KASTURI  NAGAR, Ist.  LANE,   L.I.C.OFFICE BACK PO/DIST: RAYAGADA ,

                                                                 STATE:ODISHA,  PIN  NO.765001,  PHONE/FAX                  

 NO.06856-223025.

                                     ....                                  

                                              C.C. Case  No..45/ 2014.                               

 P R E S E N T .

Sri Pradeep Kumar Dash, LL.B,                             President.

Smt. Ch.  Nirmala Kumari Raju, LLB,         Member

Sri Raj Kumar Mohana, S/o: Late: M.D. Mohana,

Gayatri Nagar, Po/Dist: Rayagada

                                                                                                                …….Complainant

                                                            Vrs.

1. Sri M/s Mobil World, Rayagada.
2. The Micro Mac Informatics Ltd. 21/24-A phase II, Narayana Industrical Area, New Delhi-10028, Phone-011-49790000.
3. Care Manager, Micromax House, 697, vidyud Vihar, Phase Vi, Gurtaon-122015, Hariyana,

                                                                                                …..Opp.Party

Counsel for the parties:

For the complainant: Self

For the O.Ps:  Sri Braja Sundar Nayak and Associates. Advocate, Rayagada

 

                                                            JUDGMENT

                          The case of the complainant is that the complainant purchased a Micromax Model AIII (Micromax Canavas) Mobile from the O.P No.1 on dt.06.10.2013 for a sale consideration of Rs.10,600/- and IMEI No.911307202380041 said mobile phone has warranty for a period of one year from the date of purchase. The OP No.1 is a authorized days the said set not work and subsequently it has started trouble for which he has be fee from any defect. But within one year it has got repair and the OP No.1 has sold the same with false promise. The OP No..1 not complied it. But in fact the OP failed to rectify defects. The parts of the above set not functioning properly within warranty period.

 

 

 

2

2.                     That for the deficiency in service it led to the complainant mental agony, financial loss of prestige in the society, after using the set for one month it has found no use at all. In spite of several contact with the O.Ps they could not hear the complaint. Hence there is inherent manufacturing defect cheating to the complainant in it.

                          The complainant demanded to return of the case or to replace the same by the Ops to which they refused and told the company can replace the same or to refund the sale price.

 

                           Hence the complainant has approached this forum for the redressal.

                           The forum has given notice to the Ops along with the copy of the complainat petition. The counsel Advocate for the O.Ps Sri Baraja Sundar Nayak has appeared before the forum. Filed counter in this case and stated that the complainant has never approached the Ops and all the allegation made by the complainant all are not true. Ops are the well established company with having good impact in the locality. If in any time the Complainant will approach the Ops they can give full service to them. The complainant also vehemently argued on the matter. After hearing from both the sides the forum came to an conclusion that, for the neglegency of the ops the consumer should not suffer mentally and financially, in order to give relief to the consumer with the time frame of the act. The order passed by this forum by this as such.

 

                                                              ORDER

                        Hence the complainant is entitled to get the relief and orders that, the petition of the complainant is allowed contest against the ops.

                        The Ops in a Cease and desist order directing them to stop to such practice forthwith and not to repeat the same.

                        The ops ordered to give new set or cost of the set Rs.10,600/- along with pay compensation of Rs.1000/- and litigation expanses of the same within one month. After lapse of one month the ops are liable to pay3% interest on the above amount and purchasing amount.

                           Failing which execution proceeding as provided U/S 25 and 27 of C.P.Act will follow.

                           Copy of the order be communicated to the parties during the course of the dy.

                           Pounced the order in the open forum on this day of 8^th July 2014.

 

Member                                                                                               President

Documents relied upon:

By the complainant:

1. By the complainant.1 Retail/Tax/Invoice Bill

By the Opp.Party: Nil

 

                                                                                                 President