Present (1) Nisha Nath Ojha,
District & Sessions Judge (Retd.) President
(2) Smt. Karishma Mandal,
Member
Date of Order : 06.11.2015
Nisha Nath Ojha
- In the instant case the Complainant has sought for following reliefs against the Opposite party:-
- To direct the opposite party to remove the defect of mobile phone of the complainant on earlier payment of bill which has been paid by the complainant to Roop Rang Telecom Centre.
- To pay Rs. 1,50,000/- ( Rs. One Lac Fifty thousand only ) as Compensation.
- To pat Rs. 50,000/- ( Rs. Fifty thousand only ) as Litigation costs.
- Brief facts of the case which led to the filing of complaint are as follows:-
The complainant has asserted that he has purchased a mobile of Nokia being model no. N – 72. After purchase complainant detected some error in the mobile phone and he was advised to approach the customer care of Nokia company. The complainant reached the care centre on 16.10.2009 for rectification of error. He was advised to approach customer care after 10 days.
It is the case of the complainant that he approached the customer care centre after 10 days. After taking receipt bill of Rs. 865/- the set was handed over to the complainant and he was informed that his mobile is functioning well. Later the complainant found that the mobile was handed over to him without rectification of error and thereafter on 04.12.2009 he approached the customer care with some well wisher with mobile and staff of the customer care confessed that the error has not been rectified but again he was asked to pay Rs. 865/- for rectification of his mobile and when the complainant objected then the staff of customer care misbehaved with him. The complainant thereafter felt cheated and sent a legal notice on 09.12.2009 which is Annexed as Annexure – 2. Thereafter the reply of service centre which is Annexed as Annexure – 3 with absurd facts.
The complainant has asserted that he has much depressed due to the conduct of the opposite party.
The fact of the case as narrated by the complainant has been mentioned in forgoing paragraph.
From the record it appears that when the registered notice sent to the opposite party, did not returned then final tamila was declared and several opportunity were given to the opposite party but opposite party did not avail the opportunity and has not filed written statement and thereafter the case was heard ex – parte on 29.10.2015.
It is needless to say that there is no any written statement or fact countering the fact asserted by the facts on affidavit in his complaint petition and hence we have no option but to rely on the same.
The fact asserted by the complainant definitely constitute the deficiency of service on the part of opposite party.
Accordingly We direct the opposite party to remove the defect of the aforesaid mobile phone of the complainant on earlier payment of bill which has already been paid by the complainant to Roop Rang Telecom Centre and hand it over to the complainant within the period of two months from the date of receipt of this order.
Aforesaid opposite party is further directed to pay Rs. 25,000/- ( Rs. Twenty Five Thousand only ) to the complainant as composite charge for compensation and litigation costs within the aforesaid period of two months.
Accordingly, this case stands allowed to the extent indicated above.
Member President
