BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BHIWANI.
Complaint No.: 99 of 2017.
Date of Institution: 27.07.2017.
Date of Order: 08.01.2019.
Ajay Kumar son of Shri Ajit Singh, resident of Brahma Colony, Dinod Road, Gali No. 2, Bhiwani, Tehsil & District Bhiwani (Haryana).
….Complainant.
Versus
1. Sunny Mobile World (authorized retailer/distributer of Spice Mobile Product), 51 Adarsh College Market, Hansi Gate, Bhiwani, Tehsil and District Bhiwani through its Proprietor.
2. Spice Company, S Global, Knbowledge Park, 19A & 19B, Sector-125, NOIDA-201301 (U. P.).
3. Saini Mobile Point (authorized service centre for Spice Mobile Product), Naya Bazar, Sukhdev Bhawan, Bhiwani, Tehsil & District Bhiwani through its Proprietor.
…...Opposite Parties.
Complaint under Section 12 of the
Consumer Protection, Act, 1986.
Before: - Hon’ble Mr. Manjit Singh Naryal, President.
Hon’ble Mr. Parmod Kumar, Member.
Hon’ble Ms. Renu Chaudhary, Member.
Present: Shri Virender Yadav, Advocate for the complainant.
OPs already exparte.
ORDER:-
PER MANJIT SINGH NARYAL, PRESIDENT
Brief facts of the complainant’s case are that he has purchased Spice MI 509 mobile set vide bill No. 13146 dated 15.8.2014 for Rs.7500/- from OP No.1. It is alleged that one year warranty was given by OP No.1. It is further alleged that OP No. 1 in order to grab amount from the complainant and by playing fraud sold a faulty mobile bearing IMEI No.911319501500963, 911319501500971, which was not working properly since its purchase and the mobile set was having manufacturing defects such as network, automatic restart, wi-fi, sim not work, battery backup and screen touch display ect. It is further alleged that the complainant visit OP No. 3 for 3-4 times for repair of the mobile set, but the same was not repaired. It is further alleged that on 12.2.2015 the mobile set has been sent to OP No. 2 by the OP No. 3 for its repair/replacement, but to no effect. It is further alleged that the Emails also sent to OPs requesting them to repair/replace the mobile set and OPs have requested some time vide their reply dated 9.3.2015 to the Emails of the complainant. It is further alleged that a legal notice has also been served upon the OPs on 12.8.2015 by the complainant through Ms. Sheela Tanwar, Advocate Bhiwani, but the same was not replied by the OPs. Thus, there is deficiency in service on the part of the OPs. Hence, this complaint.
2. On notice, no one appeared on behalf of OPs despite service and they were proceeded against exparte by the Forum vide its order dated 13.11.2017.
3. Complainant has filed his duly sworn affidavit Annexure CW1/A and Annexure C-1 to C-6 in his exparte evidence to prove his version and close the evidence.
4. We have heard learned counsel for the complainant at length and gone through the case file carefully.
5. After hearing the learned counsel for the complainant and having gone through the material available on the records, we are of the considered view that the complaint deserves acceptance, as there is deficiency & unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs. Complainant has successfully proved his case by placing on record copy of legal notice, copy of bill and copies of 3 job sheets. From the bare perusal of the job sheets, it is clear that the complainant approached the OPs many times with the request to repair/replace the mobile set, but the OPs have failed in redressing the complaint of the complainant, which amounts to deficiency in service on the part of the OPs. It is also proved on the file that the complainant has deposited the mobile set with the OP No.3 on 12.2.2015 for repair/replacement and complainant thereafter contacted the OPs many times to return the mobile, but the OPs have failed in repair/replacing the mobile set. Complainant has placed on record copy of reply dated 9.3.2015 (Annexure C2) given by OPs to the Email of the complainant vide which they have sought some time to sort-out the dispute, but the OPs have failed in repairing/ replacing the mobile set in question and kept on lingering the matter on one pretext or the other. Then in the end the complainant made the last effort to sort-out this grievance and he served a legal notice on dated 12.8.2015 through his counsel, but even then the OPs did not bother to sort-out the problem. The OPs even failed to appear before this Forum despite due service to rebut the case of the complainant. It appears that the OPs have nothing to say in this case to controvert the stand taken by the complainant. Therefore, the case of the complainant remained unchallenged and un-rebutted. Therefore, in view of the circumstances mentioned above, the complaint of the complainant is partly allowed with costs and the OPs are directed: -
i. To pay Rs.7500/- towards cost of mobile set along with interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of filing this complaint till its realization.
- pay Rs.5500/- as compensation on account of mental agony, physical harassment and hardship as well as litigation charges.
iii. To pay Rs. 2000/- as litigation charges.
The compliance of the order shall be made within 30 days from the date of the order. Certified copies of the order be sent to parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room, after due compliance.
Announced in open Forum.
Dated: 08.01.2019.
(Renu Chaudhary) (Parmod Kumar) (Manjit Singh Naryal)
Member. Member. President,
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Forum, Bhiwani.
