Haryana

Ambala

CC/173/2016

Lal Chand - Complainant(s)

Versus

Star Mobile Communication - Opp.Party(s)

S.K. Beri

29 Dec 2017

ORDER

 

 

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM AMBALA

 

                                                          Complaint case no.        :  173 of 2016

                                                          Date of Institution         :  06.04.2016

                                                          Date of decision   :   29.12.2017

 

Sh. Lal Chand, s/o Sh. Sohan Lal r/o 1353, Hargolal Road, Ambala Cantt aged 34 years.

……. Complainant.

Vs.

 

1.       Star Mobile Communication, 5392, adjoining Haryana Beauty Parlour, Nicholson Road, Ambala Cantt through its proprietor.

2.       Nanak Telecom, 74/75, Gandhi Market, Ambala Cantt through its proprietor.  

3.       MPS Telecom Pvt. Ltd. D-55, 1^st & 2^nd Floor, Okhla Industrial Area, Phase-1, New Delhi-110020.

       ….….Opposite Parties.

 

 

Before:        Sh. D.N. Arora, President.

                   Sh. Pushpender Kumar, Member.

                            

 

Present:       Sh.S.K.Beri, counsel for the complainant.

                   OP No. 2  ex parte v.o.d.17.04.2017.

OP No. 3  ex parte v.o.d. 24.08.2017.

OP No.1  given up.

 

ORDER:

                   In nutshell, brief facts of the present complaint is that the complainant had purchased a HTC mobile model Desire 826 dual sim(Blue Lagoon) from OP No.1 on 08.04.2015 for Rs. 26,000/- vide bill no.1150 having IMEI and paid whole of its price to OP No.1. After about 15 days of the purchase of the mobile in question it started giving  troubles to the complainant  as its  both cameras  started giving troubles and started malfunctioning. The outgoing voice and incoming voice started becoming disrupted and while making calls the person on the other hand complained of not reaching the voice  of complainant. The speaker and mike are also defective. When the mobile phone started giving problem  the complainant contacted  OP No.1 who asked the complainant  to contact OP no.2 and told the complainant that they cannot do anything in this regard and the complainant should contact OP No.2 to remove his grievances as OP No.2 is the authorized service centre of OP No.3. The complainant so many times on asking of OP No.2 left the mobile with OP No.2 for setting it right. Ultimately in the month of October 2015 on 29.10.2015 the OP No.2 kept the phone with them and returned the same after about 15 days saying that the problems have been removed but the complainant regret to say that the phone continued giving trouble and in the month of January 2016 on 05.01.2016 the OP again kept  the phone for removing  the troubles but even after keeping it they could not remove the defects  from the phone. In this way the OP No.2 kept the phone again vide job card dated 17.02.2016 and lastly on 25.03.2016 but till date the OP no.2 could not set the phone right and the same is lying with OP No.2. It is pertinent to mention here that  in the meantime the complainant also kept in touch with OPs No. 1 & 3 personally as well as on phone etc. and all the time they assured the complainant that his grievances will be solved but all in vain. In this way, the complainant has suffered a financial loss and mental harassment. Hence, the present complaint.

2.                Registered notices issued to Op No. 2  but none have turned up on their behalf and OP No. 2 was proceeded against exparte v.o.d. 17.04.2017  and OP No. 3 proceeded against exparte vide order dated 24.08.2017. OP No.1 given up.

3                 To prove his version complainant tendered his affidavit as Annexure CW-1/A with documents as annexure C-1 & annexure C-7 and close her evidence.

4.                We have heard learned counsel for the complainant and carefully gone through the case file. It is proved on the file that  complainant had  purchased a mobile phone  HTC mobile model Desire 826 dual sim(Blue Lagoon) from OP No.1 on 08.04.2015 for Rs. 26,000/- vide bill no.1150 (Annexure C-1) and as per the Job Sheet dated 25.03.2016 which is Annexure C-3 mobile in question was creating problems as  its  both cameras started giving troubles and started malfunctioning. The outgoing voice and incoming voice started becoming disrupted and while making calls the person on the other hand complained of not reaching the voice  of complainant. In this way the mobile in question was went out of order during warranty period, therefore, it was the duty of the OPs to get the same defect free of costs but they did not rectify the problem of mobile in question. The complainant visited service centre/OP No.2 but the grievance has not been redressed by the OP No.2. Perusal of the case file reveals  that the hand set in question is still lying with the OP No.2 who have neither repaired the hand set nor replaced the same with the new one despite the fact that it developed problems again and again and the complainant has to visit service center many times. In this way the complainant has been able to prove his case as the OPs  have failed to provide service after selling the product in question which makes them deficient in service as per Consumer Protection Act. In the present case, the Ops No.1has been given up during the pendency of the complaint, therefore no order can be passed  against OP No.1 and OPs No. 2 and 3  have also proceeded against exparte, therefore, the contents enumerated in the complaint remained un-rebutted and thus we have no other option except to believe the version as well as documents submitted by the complainant.

5.                     In view of above discussion, the present complaint is deserved to be accepted and same is hereby allowed with cost which is assessed Rs.3000/- and Ops No.2 & 3 are directed to comply with the following direction within thirty days from receipt of copy of the order:-

(i)      To refund the cost of the mobile in question amounting to Rs. 26,000/- with interest @ 9% from the date of filing of complaint till its realization.

(ii)     Also to pay a sum of Rs.3000/- on account of cost of proceedings as assessed above.

                   Copy of the order be sent to the parties concerned, free of costs, as per rules. File after due compliance be consigned to record room.

Announced on :29.12.2017    

(D.N. ARORA)

                                                                                    President

 

    

             (PUSHPENDER KUMAR)

                                                                                       Member