BEFORE THE DISTT.CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM; FATEHABAD.
Complaint Case No.358 of 2017.
Date of Instt.:14.12.2017.
Date of Decision: 24.05.2018.
Luxmi Rani D/o Om Parkash, resident of Sirsa, now at C/o Naresh Kumar son of Ram Kumar, D.C.Colony, Fatehabad, Tehsil and District Fatehabad.
...Complainant
Versus
- Technominds Mobiles, Palika Bazar, Fatehabad, Tehsil and District Fatehabad through its proprietor.
- Intex Technologies (India) Ltd., D-18/2, Industrial Area, phase-II, New Delhi 110020, through its Director.
..Opposite Parties.
Before: Sh. Raghbir Singh, President.
Sh. M.K. Khurana, Member.
Present: Sh.Pawan Sethi, Advocate for complainant.
OPs already ex-parte.
ORDER
The present complaint under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 has been filed by the complainant against the opposite parties with the averments that she purchased a mobile make Intex Aqua Ace II mobile for an amount of Rs.9250/- on13-12-2016 from OP no.1. The said mobile was having a warranty of one year. It is further submitted that in the beginning the mobile was working properly but after a few days the problems crept in the mobile i.e. network problem, its signal reception strength became very poor and the calls started disconnects during use and charging the same became very slow. Therefore the complainant handed over the mobile to OP No.1 for checking. OP No.1 kept the mobile with him and issued a job-sheet dated 26-12-2016. OP No.1 handed over the mobile to the complainant after repaired after a lapse of few weeks. However after some months, the camera of the handset became disfunctional and as such the complainant visited the service center of Op No.2 at Sirsa and OP No.2 checked the handset and issued a job-sheet dated 24-3-2017 to the complainant and thereafter OP No.2 handed over the mobile in question to the complainant after a lapse of 25-30 days. After a few days the mobile handset again started create problems as touch of the same was not working and as such the mobile was deposited by the complainant with Op No.1 and a job-sheet dated 30-3-2017 was issued to the complainant.
2. It is further submitted that on 19-6-2017 when the complainant had gone to Adampur for attending a marriage then again mobile in question got defective and the complainant got the mobile checked up at Service Station of Ops at Adampur. The service station Adampur checked the mobile and issued a charge-sheet to the complainant and after one month OP No.2 changed her handset without her consent and used, old handset was handed over to complainant. However the replaced handset also creat problems.
3. It is further submitted that the above said act on the part of Ops amounts to deficiency and unfair trade practice in rendering service to the complainant. Therefore the complainant is entitled for refund the original cost of the mobile alongwith compensation. Hence, the present complaint.
4. OP No.1 did not appear in the Forum and as such he was proceeded ex-parte on 8.2.2018.
5. The learned counsel for the complaint tendered in evidence affidavit of the complainant as Ex.CW1/A and the documents as Annexures C1 to C3 and closed the evidence.
6. We have duly considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties and have also perused the entire material placed on record. It is the case of the complainant that she purchased a mobile handset make Intex Aqua Ace II for an amount of Rs.9250/- for M/s Jewalia Mobile, Bhattu Road, Nathusari Chopta, Sirsa, Tehsil and Distt. Sirsa. The said mobile was having a warranty of one year and OP no.2 is manufacturer of the company. It is further the case of the complainant that after a few days network problem in the said mobile crept and its signal reception strength became poor and charging of the mobile also became very slow. Therefore the complainant approached to Op No.1 for rectification of the problem. Op no.1 kept the mobile with him and issued a job-sheet dated 26.12.2016 to the complainant. Thereafter, after a few weeks, the Op No.1 returned the repaired mobile to her. After some days the camera of the handset became dis-functional, so, the complainant visited service centre of Op No.2 at Sirsa and the service center at Sirsa checked the handset and issued a job-sheet dated 24.03.2017 to her and after a lapse of about 25-30 days the handset was repaired. However after a few days the touch screen of the handset became defective and as such the handset was deposited by her with Op No.1 and a job-sheet dated 30.03.2017 was issued. Therefore on 19.06.2017 when the complainant was in Adampur Mandi for attending a marriage ceremony the mobile again got defective and the handset was got checked in the service center of Op No.2 in Adampur and a job-sheet bearing No.709136577002T001 was issued. However after a lapse of one month another old and used handset was given to her without her consent. It is further the case of the complainant that the mobile handset in question was not repaired by the OPs and it remained lying most of the time in service center of Ops within the time of warranty. In support of her case the complainant in evidence tendered her affidavit wherein the averments made by her in complaint have been affirmed. The complainant also placed on record copy of the purchase bill dated 13.12.2018 as Annexure C-1 and job-sheets as Annexures C-2 and C-3. However on the other hand, the OPs did not submit any reply to the complaint and did not appear on 05.03.2016 before this Forum and as such they were proceeded ex-parte. Therefore the averments made by the complaint have gone unrebutted.
7. In view of the aforesaid discussion we are of the opinion that the complainant has been able to prove that there is manufacturing defect in the mobile handset in question and as such the present complaint is accepted.
8. Keeping in view the fact that during this period the handset has been used by the complainant, we think it appropriate to order the OP no.2 for making a payment of original cost of the mobile to the complainant by making a deduction of 25%. The OP no.2 is further directed to make a payment of Rs.2000/- to the complainant as compensation and litigation charges. Order be complied with within a period of 45 days otherwise the amount shall carry an interest at the rate of 8% from the date of receipt of the copy of this order till the date of realization. The present complaint is accordingly accepted against OP no. 2 and is dismissed against OP no. 1. A copy of this order be furnished to the parties free of cost as provided in the rules. File be consigned to record room after due compliance.
Announced in open Forum:
Dt.24.05.2018.
(M.K. Khurana) (Raghbir Singh)
Member President
DCDRF, Fatehabad.
