This Complaint coming up before us for hearing on 27-10-11 in the presence of Sri K.Sarat Babu, advocate for the complainant and opposite parties remained absent and set exparte, upon perusing the material on record and having stood over till this day for consideration this Forum made the following:-

O R D E R

Per Sri A. Hazarath Rao,  President:-

        The complainant filed this complaint under section 12 of the consumer protection Act seeking replacement of new mobile of K570 of Karbon company; Rs.5,000/- towards mental agony and for costs.

1. In brief the averments of the complaint are these:

The complainant on 14-01-11 purchased K570 of Karbon company for Rs.3,200/- with a warranty of one year.   From the date of purchase the said mobile was not functioning properly.   The complainant came to know that the mobile has got manufacturing defect.   The complainant thereupon approached the 1^st opposite party and appraised.  The complainant on the advice of the 1^st opposite party approached its service centre namely M/s Subham Communications, Guntur and handed over the mobile on 29-01-11 and obtained a receipt.   Afterwards the 1^st opposite party did not return the said mobile to the complainant though requested many a time.   Having waited for about four months the complainant got issued notice to the opposite parties on 28-05-11.   The opposite parties though received notice kept quite.   The complaint suffered lot of mental agony and estimated the same at Rs.5,000/-.    The conduct of the opposite parties amounted to deficiency of service.   The complaint therefore be allowed.

3.   The opposite parties after filing version did not chose to file affidavit though more than sufficient time was granted and as such they were set exparte.

4.   Exs.A-1 to A-6 were marked on behalf of the complainant.

5.   Now the points that arose for consideration in this complaint are:

        1.   Whether the opposite party committed deficiency of service?

        2.  Whether the complainant is entitled to compensation and if                   so to what amount?

        3. To what relief?

6.   POINT No.1:-   The complainant purchased K570 Karbon mobile from the 1^st opposite party on 14-01-11 as seen from Ex.A-1. The warranty is for one year for mobile phone, six months for batteries, charges and accessories as seen from Ex.A-1. The complainant entrusted the said mobile for repair with M/s Subham communications, Guntur on 29-01-11 for repair as seen from Ex.A-2.  The problem reported was that Bluetooth is not working as revealed from Ex.A-2.   Exs.A-3 to A-6 revealed that the complainant got issued notices on            28-05-11 and they were served on the opposite parties.  In Ex.A-1 bill it was mentioned “      

7.     Ex.A-2 prima facie revealed that the mobile set was not functioning properly.   Duty is cast on the opposite parties to rectify the defects free of charge during the warranty period.   It is the contention of the complainant that the opposite parties did not return the mobile after rectifying the defects.  The burden is on the opposite parties to prove that they delivered the mobile under Ex.A-2 to the complainant duly rectifying the defects.   As the opposite parties did not chose to file their evidence affidavit the contention of the complainant is deemed to have been admitted.  Under those circumstances, we opine that the opposite parties committed deficiency of service.   We therefore answer this point in favour of the complainant. 

8.   POINT No.2:-   The complainant claimed Rs.5,000/- as damages for mental agony.    No doubt any person will be put to a sort of agony when any instrument purchased by him did not function properly.  The affidavit as well as the complaint was silent as to how he estimated the damages at Rs.5,000/-.   Considering the value of the mobile and the duration awarding a sum of RS.1,000/- twards damages will meet ends of justice.   Therefore this point is answered accordingly in favour of the complainant. 

9.   POINT No.3:-   In view of above findings, in the result the complaint is allowed partly as indicated below:

1. The opposite parties are directed to return the mobile covered by Ex.A-1 to the complainant duly rectifying the defects or cost of the mobile i.e., Rs.3,200/-.
2.  The opposite parties are directed to pay Rs.1,000/- (Rupees one thousand only) towards damages and Rs.1,000/- (Rupees one thousand only) towards costs to the complainant.
3. The above order shall be complied with in six weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of the order.

        Typed to my dictation by the Junior Steno, corrected by me and pronounced in the open Forum, this the 29^th day of October, 2011.    

       MEMBER                            MEMBER                            PRESIDENT

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

                                        DOCUMENTS MARKED

For Complainant:        

                                                                             PRESIDENT

Read by:

Compared by: