Before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Rohtak.
Complaint No. : 204.
Instituted on : 08.05.2018.
Decided on : 22.02.2019.
Pardeep, age 26 years, son of Sh. Bhoop Singh, Resident of Bhagana Panna, Kharkhra, Rohtak, Mobile No. 9802227788.
.......................Complainant.
Vs.
- Swastik Systems-CPT SCF-42, HUDA Complex, Rohtak.
- Motorola Mobility India Pvt. Ltd., 12th Floor Tower D, DLF Cyber Greens, DLF Cyber City, Gurgaon-122002, Haryana, India.
3. Darshita Aashiyana Private Limited, Unit No. 1, Khewat/Khata No. 373/400, Mustail No. 31, Village Taoru, Tehsil Taoru, District Mewat, On Bilaspur Taru Road, Mewat, Haryana-122105 through its Manager.
……….Opposite parties.
COMPLAINT U/S 12 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,1986.
BEFORE: SH.NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT.
SH. VED PAL, MEMBER.
SMT.SAROJ BALA BOHRA, MEMBER
Present: Sh. Jasvir Kundu, Advocate for the complainant.
Opposite parties exparte.
ORDER
NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT:
1. Brief facts of the case are that complainant has purchased a mobile phone Lenovo bearing Modal No. XT1902-3 bearing EMI No. 864510039800613 – 864510039869295, vide invoice No. DEL2-415679 on 11.02.2018 through online mode with the order Number 406-0158111-0443514 dated 11.02.2018 for Rs.12,999/-. That at the time of purchasing, the said handset has 1 year warranty period. It is alleged that sometimes back the phone started giving problems as like heating, hanging and battery issues etc., so, the complainant approached the OP No. 1 on 06.03.2018, but the official of OP No. 1 after checking the phone and prepare Job-sheet No. SOIN0780031803060006 and kept the phone with him after that returning the said phone without complete repair to the complainant. It is further alleged that after sometime the mobile phone again same having same problems and on 21.04.2018 the complainant again approached to OP No. 1 regarding the same problems, but official of the OP No. 1 did not pay any heed to the genuine request of the complainant and the official of the OP No. 1 after checking the phone kept in the care shop and again provided a job sheet No. SOIN0780031804210007 on dated 21.04.2018 to the complainant and returned the same without complete repair. That the act of opposite parties of selling a defective mobile is illegal and there is deficiency in service on the part of OPs. Hence, this complaint and it is prayed that opposite parties may kindly be directed to pay an amount of Rs.12,999/- towards cost of mobile alongwith interest thereon from the date of purchase till payment to complainant and also to pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation and Rs. 11,000/- as litigation expenses as explained in relief clause.
2. After registration of complaint, notice was issued to OPs No. 2 and 3 through registered post not received back either served or unserved. Hence, OPs no. 2 and 3 were proceeded against exparte vide order dated 03.07.2018 of this Forum. Whereas, on 11.09.2018 none has appeared on behalf of OP No. 1, hence, OP No. 1 was proceeded against exparte vide order dated 11.09.2018.
3. Ld. counsel for the complainant has tendered affidavit Ex.CW1/A, documents Ex.CW1 to Ex.CW6 and closed his evidence.
4. We have heard learned counsel for the complainant and have gone through material aspects of the case very carefully.
5. Perusal of the record reveals that beside job sheets Ex.C3 to Ex.C6 complainant has placed on record copy of estimate/quotation issued by HCL ME EXCLUSIVE STORE, OM COMPUTERS, Palika Baazar, Rohtak as per which there are so many problems i.e. battery heating, phone heating and hanging problems in the alleged mobile which could not be removed by the OPs during the warranty period. On the other hand, OPs did not appear despite service and as such it is presumed that OPs have nothing to say in the matter and all the allegations leveled by the complainant against the Ops regarding not removing the defect of mobile stands proved. Hence, there is deficiency in service on the part of OPs and complainant is entitled for the refund of price after deduction of 20% depreciation on it i.e. Rs.12,999 – Rs. 599 = Rs.10,400/-.
6. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, complaint is allowed and we hereby direct the opposite party No.2 to pay Rs.10,400/-(Rupees ten thousand four hundred only) towards cost of mobile set alongwith interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of filing the present complaint i.e. 08.05.2018 till its realization and also to pay a sum of Rs.4000/-(Rupees four thousand only) as compensation and litigation expenses to the complainant within one month from the date of decision. Mobile set in question is already in the possession of OPs.
7. Copy of this order be supplied to both the parties free of costs.
8. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.
Announced in open court:
22.02.2019.
.....................................................
Nagender Singh Kadian, President
..........................................
Ved Pal Hooda, Member.
……………………………….
Saroj Bala Bohra, Member
