IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ALAPPUZHA

Tuesday the 20^th day of March, 2018

Filed on 09.08.2017

Present

1.         Smt. Elizabeth George (President)

2.         Sri. Antony Xavier (Member)

3.         Smt. Jasmine D (Member)

in

CC/No.216/2017

 Between

Complainant:-                                                                                             Opposite parties:-

Sri.Chacko Rajan                                                                    1.         Vipin instacart Service Pvt.Ltd

Muringasseri Veedu                                                                            Near Bhagavathipady, SBT

Kottarkavu Muri                                                                                 Kayamkulam 180  C  

Mavelikkara Village                                                                            Alappuzha

Alappuzha                                                      

                                                                                                 2.       Samsung India Electronics Pvt.Ltd

                                                                                                           20^th to 24^th  Floor, Two Horizon

                                                                                                           Centre, Golf course Road, Sector. 43

                                                                                                           DLFPH Gurgaon, Haryana -122 202

                                                                                                3.         Proprietor

                                                                                                            Perumpattil Associates

                                                                                                            1^st Floor, N.S.S Building,

                                                                                                            Puthenkavu, Maveliakara 690 101

O R D E R

SMT. JASMINE D. (MEMBER)

             The case of the complaint in short is as follows:-

            The case of the complainant is that complainant had ordered a Samsung Galaxy S 7 phone through Flip cart.  The 1^st opposite party on 27/5/2017 delivered the said product and the complainant paid an amount of Rs. 43,400/- to the 1^st opposite party.  But unfortunately on the 5^th day of the purchase ie. on 1/6/ 2017 the product became defective and the complainant could not switch on the phone.  The phone was completely dead, and on 2/6/2017 the complainant approached the authorized service center of Samsung they inspected the phone and intimated that the mother board of the said phone is defective.  There after the complainant approached the 1^st opposite party and intimated about the defect.  But the 1^st opposite party informed the complainant that the said product was delivered to them by Flip kart.  And accordingly the complainant on 3/6/2017 sent a letter to Flip cart demanding the refund of the amount paid But there was no response from the flip cart.  There after the complainant again sent letter on 12/6/2017 and on 19/6/2017   but the letters were returned to the complainant with an endorsement ‘no such addressee’.  There after the complainant approached the 1^st opposite party but they did not made any earnest effort to redress and grievance of the complainant.  So the complainant filed complaint before the Circle Inspector of Police but the problem was not resolved.  The act of the 1^st opposite parties caused much mental agony and inconvenience to the complainant and hence filed this complaint.

            2. Notice was served to the opposite parties. Additional 2^nd opposite party appeared before the Forum and filed version.  Opposite party 1 and additional opposite party 3 did not appear before the Forum the hence set exparte. 

            3. Version of the 2^nd opposite party is as follows:-

            That the complainant had wrongly impleaded 2^nd opposite party Samsung India Electronics  Pvt Ltd. to the instant complaint filed before the Hon’ble District Forum, Alappuzha, Kerala.  The complainant has filed the instant complaint without verifying the facts and exercising  reasonable due diligence and  therefore have wrongly impleaded opposite party to the complaint and the same is also clear  from the fact that no cause of action arose against the answering Opposite party and also no relief has been claimed against the answering Opposite party.  That though the content of paragraph does not concern the answering opposite party fully but the answering opposite party refers to the preliminary objections mentioned above.   That no cause of action ever arose against the answering opposite parties.  That the answering opposite parties or their agents, dealers, service centre has not committed any deficiency of service and unfair trade practice to the complainant and is not responsible or liable for the payment of any amount to the complainant and complainant should be put to strict proof of any contrary contention.  That it is stated that no cause of action ever arose against 2^nd opposite party Samsung India Electronics Pvt.Ltd or its service centre, dealers and there is no deficiency of service or negligence on the part of the 2^nd opposite party or their officials, agents, in light of what is stated above and the same is not being repeated herein for the sake of brevity.  Hence the complaint may be dismissed.

            4. Complainant was examined as PW1 and documents Ext.A1 to A5 were marked.

            5.  Points for the consideration are:-

1) Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties?

2)  Whether the complainant is entitled to get any reliefs?

5.   The case of the complainant is that complainant   has ordered a mobile phone through filp cart and the 1^st opposite party delivered the mobile phone to the complainant and the 1^st opposite party has received an amount of Rs. 43,400/- from the complainant towards the cost of the mobile phone.  But on the 5^th day of the date of purchase the product became defective and the complainant has entrusted the said phone to the authorized service centre of the Samsung.  The inspected the phone and intimated the complainant that the mother board of the said phone is defective.   The complainant approached the 1^st opposite party and requested to refund the amount paid.  But the 1^st opposite party failed to do so.  The complainant sustained much mental agony and hence filed this complaint.    

6. The complainant produced five documents which were marked as   Ext.A1 to A5.  Ext.A1 is the Invoice dtd 24/5/2017.   Ext.A2 is the job sheet dtd. 3/6/2017.  Ext.A3 is the registered letters           (5 nos).  Ex.A4 is the copy of complaint filed before the CI of Police. Mavelikara.  Ext.A5 is the legal notice issued to the 1^st opposite party dtd. 5/7/2017.     The specific case of the complainant is that the 1^st opposite party has cheated the complainant by supplying a duplicate product.  According to the complainant he had ordered the phone through Flip kart and the 1^st opposite party has delivered the phone to the complainant at his house and collected an amount of Rs. 43,400/- from the complainant.   But after 4 days from the date of purchase the set became totally functionless and the complainant could not use the phone and the complainant approached the authorized service centre of Samsung they intimated that the mother board of the said phone is defective.  The complainant approached the 1^st opposite party many times and requested for refund of the amount paid but the 1^st opposite party has not made any earnest effort to redress the grievance of the complainant on verifying the entire documents it is clear the product became defective immediately after purchase.  Since the opposite party has not made any earnest effort to redress the grievance of the complainant they have committed deficiency in service.  The complainant could not use the phone.  Ext A2 clearly shows that the product became defective within two days from the date of purchase.  Since the product became defective immediately after purchase the complainant is entitled to get the refund of the price of the product.  When the complainant was examined as PW1 he deposed that he has no complaint against additional 2^nd opposite party and the complaint is against 1^st opposite party only.   According to the complainant he had paid the amount of Rs.43,400/- to the 1^st opposite party.  It is clear from the documents that the product became defective immediately after purchase and the defect has been intimated to the 1^st opposite party.  But the 1^st opposite party has not made any earnest effort to redress the grievances of the complainant.  Even though notice was served to the 1^st opposite party.  They did not appear before the Forum. The 1^st opposite party failed to replace the product or to refund its price so they have committed deficiency in service.   Since there is any deficiency in service on the part of the 1^st opposite party they are liable to refund the amount collected from the complainant towards the cost of the mobile phone together with compensation and cost.

            In the result 1^st opposite party is directed to refund the amount Rs. 43,400/- (Rupees forty three thousand and four hundred only) to the complainant. The 1^st opposite party is further directed to pay an amount of Rs. 3000/-(Rupees Three thousand only) towards compensation and Rs.2000/- (Rupees Two thousand only) towards cost. The order shall be complied within one month from the date of the receipt of this order, failing which the amount Rs.43,400 shall carry interest @ 9% per annum from the date of order till realization.  On compliance of the order the complainant is directed to return the defective product to the 1^st opposite party.                                                                                                   

       Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by him corrected by me and pronounced in open Forum on this the 20^th day of March, 2018.

                                                                                    Sd/- Smt. Jasmine.D.  (Member) : .                                                                                

                                                                                    Sd/- Smt. Elizabeth George (President):

                                                                        Sd/- Sri. Antony Xavier (Member) :

Appendix:-

Evidence of the complainant:-

PW1               -           Chacko Rajan (witness)         

Ext.A1           -           Retail invoice dtd 24/5/2017

Ext.A2           -           Job sheet dtd 3/6/2017

Ext.A3           -           Registered letters (5 Nos)

Ext.A4           -           Copy of Complaint

Ext.A5           -           Legal notice.  

Evidence of the opposite parties:-   Nil

                                             // True Copy //

                                                           By Order                                                                                                                                      

  Senior Superintendent

To

         Complainant/Opposite party/S.F.

Typed by:-Br/- 

Compared by:-