JUDGEMENT

Sajal  Kanti  Jana, Member – This consumer complaint  u/s 12 of the C.P. Act, 1986 has been filed by the complainant Debabrata Mukherjee against the above named O.Ps. alleging deficiency in service on their part.

Complainant’s case in brief is as follows:-

          The complainant purchased a phone being no. S/VO 53259 model name ELUGA-Switch (Panasonic) priced at Rs.10,999/- through flipkart dealer i.e. O.P. No.-3 on 16.06.2016 and the same was delivered at complainant place at Kadamtala, Howrah-711 101. After such purchase the complainant had been using the said phone but after six months the complainant faced trouble in operating the said phone and in fact the software got hanged and the complainant was compelled to reboot the device for restarting the phone. On or about 1^st week of June, 2017 i.e. nearing the period of  expiry of the warranty the phone got hanged and become totally dead. The complainant requested the O.Ps. for replacing the mobile set or for replacing the same. After examining the mobile hand set the O.P. No.-2 routinely estimated the cost of repair of the same against payment of Rs.11,297/- which was later reduced to Rs.8,475/-. The complainant refused to pay the said amount and the O.Ps. thereafter flatly refused to replace the mobile or to repair the same. Hence the complainant praying for an order of direction to the O.Ps either to replace the mobile set with a new one or to repair the same with their own cost and for an order of compensation of Rs.30,000/- and for litigation cost.

          All the three O.Ps. were duly served the notices of this case . O.P. No.-1 appeared and prayed for time for filing W/V but his said prayer was refused as because he did not file the W/V within 45 days from the date of received the notice and as such the case was ordered to be heard exparte.

          Hence the exparte hearing.

POINT FOR DECISION

            Whether the complainant  is entitled to get the reliefs as prayed for?

DECISION WITH REASONS

To prove his case the  complainant has filed his written examination-in-chief supported by affidavit and he has also filed all relevant documents in support of his case. After perusing the petition of complaint, all relevant documents and written evidences of the complainant supported by affidavit remaining unchallenged we are constrained to hold the complainant’s case is proved and he is entitled to the reliefs as prayed for.  

            Hence,

                        it is,

                                    O R D E R E D

            that the Complaint Case No. 362/2017 is allowed exparte with cost against all the O.Ps. O.Ps. are directed either to repair the mobile set in question of their own cost or to replace the subject mobile phone with a new one of the same brand within one month from the date of order. They are further directed to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- as compensation and Rs.5,000/- as litigation cost to the complainant within one month from this date of order. In default the complainant will be at liberty to put this order in execution according to law.

            Let a plain copy of this order be given to the complainant free of cost.

Dictated and corrected by me.

( Sajal Kanti Jana )                                                         

        Member,                               

D.C.D.R.F., Howrah.