Punjab

Sangrur

CC/650/2014

HARJINDER KAUR - Complainant(s)

Versus

Subhash Telecom - Opp.Party(s)

Sh.Nem Kumar

25 May 2015

ORDER

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SANGRUR

                                      

                                                          Complaint no. 650

Instituted On 10.12.2014

Decided On    25.05.2015                                                                            

Harjinder Kaur aged 38 years d/o S. Chhaju Singh resident of House No.354, Street No.8A, Hareri Road, Railway Crossing, Ram Basti, Sangrur Tehsil and District Sangrur.        

                                                …. Complainant.      

                                         Versus

 

1.     Subhash Telecom, through its Proprietor/ Partner/ Manager/ Kranti Chowk, Dhuri, District Sangrur.  

2.     M/s Gaurav Communications, through its Proprietor/ Partner/ Manager/ Street No.2, Near Railway Chowk, Gaushalla Road, Sangrur.

3.     Samsung India Electronics Pvt. Limited, through its Manager/M.D, 7^th & 8^th Floor, IFCI Tower, 61 Nehru Palace, New Delhi-110019.   

      ….Opposite parties.

 

FOR THE COMPLAINANT     Shri Nem Kumar , Advocate                          

 

FOR OPP. PARTIES No.1&2  Exparte                     

 

FOR OPP. PARTY NO.3        Shri J.S.Sahni, Advocate                    

   

Quorum

                   

Sukhpal Singh Gill, President

                    K.C.Sharma, Member

Sarita Garg, Member

                                   

 

 

 

ORDER    

 

Sukhpal Singh Gill, President

 

1.             Harjinder Kaur, complainant has preferred the present complaint against the opposite parties (referred to as OPs in short) on the ground that he purchased one Samsung mobile model -9000-Samsung –Note-3 of OP No.3 company from the OP No.1 for an amount of Rs.44700/- vide invoice number RI-1259 dated 13.11.2013.  At the time of purchase of said mobile set, one year warranty was given by OPs. The said mobile set developed with technical defects of getting heated up, automatic off, incoming and outgoing problem due to its manufacturing defect within warranty  period. The complainant approached the OP No.1 who advised him to further approach OP No.2 to rectify the defects. On the advice of the OP No.1, the complainant approached OP No.2 in the last week of September 2014 who received the defective mobile set.  The mobile set was returned by OP No.2 stating that there was some problem of software which was/is to be upgraded/undated  and the set has been made in working condition. Again on 13.10.2014 the screen of the mobile set was changed and software was again upgraded. The mobile set is still having said earlier complained defects. The OPs  failed to repair the mobile set to the satisfaction of the complainant free of costs or to replace the same or to refund its price as per their assurance alleging the mobile set to be out of warranty period wrongly. Thus, alleging deficiency in service on the part of OPs, the complainant has sought following reliefs - 

i)      OPs be directed to make the mobile free from any defect and in case of non-making of mobile defect free then for replacement of same with new one of the same model or to refund its price Rs.44700/- along with interest @18% per an num ,

ii )    OPs be directed to pay to the complainant an amount of Rs.30,000/- on account of mental agony and physical harassment and to pay Rs.11000/- as litigation expenses.

2.             After receipt of present complaint, notices were sent to the OPs. The OPs No.1 and 2 did not appear and they were proceeded exparte whereas OP no.3 appeared through counsel.

3.             In reply filed by OP No.3, preliminary objections on the grounds of cause of action, territorial jurisdiction, maintainability and misuse of process of law have been taken up.  It is submitted that the complainant submitted his handset with OP No.2 for the first time on 19.09.2014 after 10 months of  its purchase and then on 18.10.2014  and on every visit his  problems very duly rectified and handset was delivered back in OK condition to the satisfaction of the complainant.  The performance of the mobile  phone depends upon the physical  handling of the product apart from installation and downloading of various mobile applications, games and other software. The problems alleged by the complainant have arisen due to physical mishandling of the handset. On 18.10.2014 the complainant visited  the OP No.2 but on inspection of handset by the service engineer  no problem was found.  The complainant has neither  alleged any specific irrepairable manufacturing defect and inferior quality of the specific part of the product nor filed any documentary evidence. It is submitted that under the warranty OP is  only liable to repair the defective parts of the product in question. The complainant has failed to prove on record that hand set in question cannot be repaired, thus he is not entitled for replacement or refund of price. Thus, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the OP No.3

4.             In support of his case the complainant has tendered documents Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-6 and closed evidence.  On the other hand OP No.3 has tendered document an affidavit Ex.OP3/1 to Ex.OP3/4 and closed evidence.

5.             In the present complaint, the mobile set in question was produced by the complainant on 01.04.2015 and same was handed over to the learned counsel for the OP No.3 for checking.  The same was returned to the complainant  on 15.04.2015  with the submission that  now the same is working properly as defects have been removed and in support of his version the learned counsel for the OP No.3 has also placed on record report which is Ex.OP3/2. Thereafter the complainant again made a statement that the mobile set is still not in working properly and as such an independent expert was appointed to ascertain the true facts in this case.

6.             An independent expert namely Mr. Sourav Goyal of Sourav Communications, Gaushala Road,  Sangrur  after inspecting the  mobile set in question has submitted his report dated 13.05.2015 in which the expert has  observed that “ the set is in non-working condition. The mobile is having defect in its motherboard due to short circuiting or otherwise”

7.             During the arguments learned counsel for the OP No.3 has submitted that  OP No.3 is ready to repair the mobile set but from the facts stated above, we find that the OP No.3 has submitted report dated 15.04.2015 Ex.OP3/2  that the mobile set has been repaired and defects have been removed but the fact is that  still the mobile set in question is not working properly and  the independent expert has given report which has been placed on record as Ex.CX. As the motherboard is the main part of any electronic item like computer and smart phones and if the same is defective and when already the  OP No.3 tried to repair the same but as the OP No.3 could not repair the same and the defect still persists , so the plea of the OP No.3 that the mobile set could be repaired is not tenable.

8.             In view of the above discussion, we find that  the mobile set in question is having manufacturing defect and OPs are deficient in rendering service. So, accordingly we allow the complaint and direct the OP No.3 to replace the mobile set  with new one of the same model with fresh warranty or in the alternative to refund its price amount i.e. Rs. 44700/- along with interest @9% per annum from the date of filing of complaint  till realization. However the complainant is directed to return the defective mobile set  to the OPs in case of replacement of the same. We further order the OP No.3 to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs.10000/- being the consolidated amount of compensation on account of mental agony, harassment and litigation expenses. 

9.             This order of ours shall be complied with within 30 days from the receipt of copy of the order. Copy of the order be supplied to the parties free of charge. File be consigned to records in due course.

                Announced.

May 25, 2015.

 

 

 

 

 

( Sarita Garg)        ( K.C.Sharma)       ( Sukhpal Singh Gill)           

Member                Member                    President

 

BBS/-