The brief history of the case of the complainant is that he purchased a Gionee Mobile handset Model No.L700, IMEI No.868114027222462/868114025722460 from OP.1 for Rs.2050/- vide Invoice No.8389 dt.25.7.2016 but after one month of its use the handset did not start at all and remained switch off without any reason.  It is submitted that on 24.8.2016 the complainant submitted the handset with OP.1 who happens to be the Authorized Service Centre of said handset.  It is further submitted that the OP.1 till date is not taking up repairs of handset in spite of repeated approach although the handset is well within its warranty and hence the complainant is suffering.  Thus alleging deficiency in service on the part of the Ops he filed this case praying the Forum to direct the Ops to refund Rs.2050/- towards cost of the handset and to pay Rs.12, 000/- towards compensation and costs to the complainant.

2.                     In spite of valid notice the Ops neither filed counter nor participated in the proceeding in any manner and hence remained ex-parte.  After several opportunities as the Ops did not turn up, we heard from the A/R for the complainant for orders on merit.  The complainant has filed certain documents along with affidavit in support of his case.

3.                     The complainant has filed copy of retail invoice dt.25.7.2016 issued by OP.1 in support of purchase of alleged handset for Rs.2050/-.  The case of the complainant is that after one month of use, the handset did not function and became switch off for which he handed over the set to OP.1 (dealer & ASC).  In support of said averment, he has filed copy of service job sheet dt.24.8.2016 issued by OP.1 for the complaint “Dead, Not switch on” with warranty clause “In warranty” but as per allegation of the complainant, the OP.1 has not returned the handset with repair till date.

4.                     During warranty period, the Company or ASC is duty bound either to repair the handset or replace with a new one if the handset is having manufacturing defect.  In this case the OP.1 after receiving the defective set remained silent without taking any step.  The job sheet issued by OP.1 does not say anything about any physical damage caused by the complainant to the handset or the handset became defective due to the fault of the complainant.  Hence non repair of the set or non replacement of the set with a new one amounts to deficiency in service on the part of OP.1.  Due to non participation of Ops in the proceeding, we failed to know anything about the present position of the handset and whether the OP.1 has taken up the issue with OP.2.  In the above circumstances, we feel it proper to direct the OP.1 either to return the handset with proper repair or to refund its cost to the complainant with interest from the date of purchase and in any case the OP.2 is to pay Rs.1500/- towards cost to the complainant.

5.                     Hence ordered that the complaint petition is allowed in part and the OP.1 is directed either to return the handset with due repair to the satisfaction of the complainant with further one year warranty or to refund Rs.2050/- with interest @ 12% p.a. from the date of purchase i.e. 25.7.2016 and in any case the OP.1 is directed to pay Rs.1500/- towards cost to the complainant.  The above directions are to be complied by the OP.1 within 30 days from the date of communication of this order.

(to dict.)