DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM  PALAKKAD

Dated this the  24^th day of August  2015

Present   : Smt.Shiny.P.R. President

               : Smt.Suma.K.P.  Member                              Date of filing: 27/08/2014

                                                      (C.C.No.123/2014)       

Vinod.V

S/o.Viswanathan,

Cheriyadath House, Chellikkal,

Kongad Post, Palakkad – 678 631                              -        Complainant

(By Adv.Jayasree.V ) 

Vs

1.The General  Manager

    Samsung India Electronics Pvt.Ltd.

    B1 Sector, 81 Phase – 2, Noida Dt.

    Goutham Bunddh Nagar,

    Uttarpradesh.

   (By Adv.P.Fazil)

2.Proprietor,

   C.M.Enterprises,

   C.S.I.Shopping Complex,

   Near Mission School Jn.

   T.B.Road, Palakkad

3.The Service Manager,

    Service Centre : 0005380157

    Blue Point, 12/657(6),

    1^st Floor, M5 Business,

    Near Post Office,

    Palakkad – 678 001                                     -        Opposite parties

   (By Adv.S.Sijin)

O R D E R

By Smt.Shiny.P.R.  President.

Brief facts of the complaint.

On 16/8/2013 complainant has purchased a mobile phone named Samsung Galaxy S7562 from 2^nd opposite party for an amount of Rs.9800/-.1^st  opposite party is the manufacturer of the mobile phone. Immediately after the purchase the phone showed the defects of intermittent sim2 not working, hanging and intermittent unit auto off. Then complainant approached the 2^nd opposite party to rectify  the defects. As per  the advice of the 2^nd opposite party complainant went to 3^rd opposite party to cure the defects and 3^rd opposite party cured the defects on that day. Again these defects are shown on 13/12/2013, 24/4/2014 and 11/7/2014. Complainant submitted that all these occasions defects are cured but the same is still continued. On 16/7/2014 again complainant approached 3^rd opposite party to rectify the same problem. At  that time 3^rd opposite party said that the phone has some manufacturing defects. Then the complainant approached the 2^nd opposite party to get it replaced with new one.

But they rejected the claim of the complainant. At last on 21-7-2014 complainant sent a lawyer notice to opposite parties to get the cost and compensation for mental agony. But no reply was sent by them.

Complainant submitted that opposite parties neither replaced the mobile set nor refund the cost of the mobile. The act of the opposite parties amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. Complainant further submitted that by the act of opposite parties complainant has sustained huge financial loss and mental agony. Hence the complaint. Complainant prays for an order directing opposite parties to pay a sum of Rs.9800/- towards the cost of mobile phone, Rs.50,000/- towards compensation for discomfort, mental agony, hardship and financial loss caused to the complainant alongwith cost and interest.

Complaint was admitted and was issued notice to all opposite parties.

All opposite parties are represented before the Forum, 2^nd and 3^rd opposite parties  filed vakalath. But they were not filed version.

Complainant filed chief affidavit. Ext.A1 to A3 are marked from the side of complainant. MO1 also marked.

Issues are to be considered

1. Whether there is any unfair trade practice and deficiency in service on the part of  opposite parties ?
2. If so, what is the relief?

Issues 1 & 2

    We have perused the documents on record. The purchase of the mobile phone was proved as per Ext.A1 bill. Ext.A2 job card issued by 3^rd opposite party shows that the mobile phone had the defects of intermittent Sim2 not working, hanging intermittent unit auto off. These defects are occurred within 2-3 months of purchase of mobile phone that is within the warranty period issued by opposite parties. As such it is a clear proof of manufacturing defects of the mobile. Several times complainant approached opposite parties to replace mobile or refund the cost of the same. But they did not do so. From the evidence adduced  by the complainant, we arrived at a conclusion that by selling defective products, opposite parties committed unfair trade practice. Hence the opposite parties liable to compensate the complainant for the financial loss and mental agony sustained.

In the result complaint is allowed. Opposite parties are jointly and severally liable to pay Rs.9,800/- (Nine thousand eight hundred only)  towards the cost of mobile phone, Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand only) as compensation for mental agony and Rs.2,000/- (Rupees Two thousand only) as cost of proceedings.

Order shall be complied within a period of one month from the date of receipt of order, failing which complainant is eligible for 9% interest per annum for the whole amount from the date of order, till realization.

On complying the order of the Forum, opposite parties have the right to get back the phone produced before the Forum.

Pronounced in the open court on this the 24^th day of August  2015.

                                                                                             Sd/-

                      Shiny.P.R.

                      President   

                           Sd/-

                      Suma.K.P.

                      Member

Appendix

Exhibits marked on the side of complainant

Ext.A1   - Tax invoice dated 16/8/2013

Ext.A2  – Photocopy of Service Request  dated11-7-2014  

Ext.A3  – Photocopy of lawyer notice sent to opposite parties along with postal

              receipts.

MO1 – Mobile Phone Samsung make

Cost 

Rs.2,000/-allowed as cost of the proceedings.