It is a case under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act filed by the Complainant Shri Surajit Kumar Das against the O.P, Manager In-Charge, Xiomi Technology India Private Limited and others for directing the Opposite Party to refund the price of Mobile and to pay damages for suffering mental pain and agony suffered by the complainant.
The case of the complainant, in brief, inter alia, is that the O.P Manager-in-Charge, Qarmatek Services Private Limited, Ahmedabad, Gujrat, is the authorized service center. The O.P
XIOMI Technology India Pvt. Ltd. Karnataka, is the manufacturer of M.i. Mobile at Bangalore, in Karnataka. The proforma O.P. Ganapati Cellular, Satish Mansion, Sevoke Road, Siliguri is the service center of XIOMI Technology India Private Limited. The complainant purchased Smart Phone in brand name and style XIOMI Mi4 16GB and Mobile No.Mi4 16GB of while colour. That Mobile bears IMEI 867079020278676 from official site of Mi Mobile. Said Mobile was shown by TVS Electronics Limited. BLR-PC C/o Proconnect Supply Chain Solutions Limited Sy. No. 102/1, Adakamaranhalli Village City, Bangalore, State : Karnataka, vide Tax Invoice No. SC7601/15-16/127604 dated 12.10.2015 VAT/TIN CST No. 29980051756 with one year warranty from the date of purchase. In October, 2016 the complainant noticed that said mobile had not been functioning properly. There is some touch-screen problem on the upper side of the hand-set. On 7.10.2016 the complainant visited authorized service center of Mi Mobile, but the office remained closed due to Durga Puja Vacation. The complainant then informed the matter to the opposite party Qarmatek Services Private Ltd. Thereafter the complainant lodged complaint being no. 9000034753 dated 8.10.2016 and e-mail was sent by said O.P no.1 via PICK Mi bearing e-mail address th and 10th October, 2016. The warranty period of mobile-set would expire on 11.10.2016. In reply one Mr. Pramod via Xiaomi India Customer Services through e-mail expressed sincere apology for inconvenience caused to the complainant. As per instruction of Qarmatek Services Private Ltd. the complainant filled up Declaration Form and VAT Form 403 and also paid Rs.189/- towards logistic fee and waited for pick up. Ultimately said Mobile-set was picked up by Fed Ex courier Service, as recommended by the O.P on 12.10.2016. At the time of servicing Mobile hand-set Fed Ex courier service checked the said Mobile and confirmed having touch-screen problem. On 19.102016 said O.P Qarmatek Services Private Ltd. stated that said hand-set had physical damage and directed to pay Rs.7,600/- including all charges. If no confirmation is received from the end of the complainant by Qarmatek Services Pvt. Ltd. the mobile hand-set will be returned to the complainant. The complainant did not give reply to the e-mail. On 25.10.2016 the O.P Qarmatek Services Pvt Ltd informed the complainant that Mobile hand-set was returned. On 26.10.2016 the complainant received said Mobile. When the complainant opened the box it was found that the mobile set was in dead condition. Then the complainant switched on the Mobile but he had failed to charge the same. Immediately dead condition of the hand-set Mobile was informed to the O.P Qarmatek Services Pvt. Ltd. On 27.10.2016 the O.P Qarmatek Center sent e-mail to the complainant requesting to resolve the problem by making contact with the concerned handling with incident id bearing no. 161027-000048. The complainant made contact with the O.P Qarmatek Services Private Ltd. but no one responded to his request. On 2.11.2016 one e-mail was received from e-mail suraz das 1970 @ yahoo.in with enquiry no. 9000036457. In response to repeated request of the complainant the O.P XIOMI Technology India Pvt. Ltd, Bangalore sent e-mail on 12.11.2016 for pick up of Mobile hand-set . The complainant again filled up Declaration Form and VAT Form 403 on 14.11.2016. The courier company Fed Ex Courier Service picked up the Mobile of complainant. On 17.11.2016 the complainant received e-mail from O.P Qarmatek Services Private Ltd where it was stated that the hand-set had some physical damage. The hand-set was not covered by the manufacturer warranty and to repair the same estimated cost will be Rs.17,194/-. But on 24.11.2016 the complainant received back the hand-set through Courier Service with an utter shock when complainant came to know that the opposite party Qarmatek Services Private Ltd. had returned the Mobile hand-set without resolving the problem. The complainant lodged complaint through Xiomi Technology India Private Ltd. Bangalore, bearing complaint no.179403 dated 4.3.17. On 17.4.2017 the O.P. Qarmatek Services Pvt. Ltd. replied through e-mail that they could not make contact with the complainant through his Mobile bearing no. 9832067483, though the complainant kept his contact open round the clock. The complainant made contact with the O.P Services Private Ltd. through Customer Care Number for resolving the problem, but he did not get any positive response from Xiomi Technology India Private Ltd, Bangalore. Lastly, on 9.12.2017 the complainant sent e-mail whereby the complainant has given his alternative mobile phone number. On 25.5.2017 the complainant made contact with the O.P Qarmatek Services Pvt. Ltd. over telephone regarding the problem crept in Mobile hand-set, but no fruitful result has been yielded. Thereafter he sent legal notice through his Ld. Advocate Pritam Ghosh to the O.P Qarmatek Services Pvt. Ltd. for compensation amounting to Rs. 50,000/-. Thereafter the complainant sent legal notice through his advocate Shri Satyoki Basu on 3.4.2018 demanding above amount of compensation from the opposite party. There is no laches and negligence from the part of complainant in making contact with the Qarmatek Services Pvt. Ltd. The O.P did not return his Mobile hand-set. The hand-set is not in workable condition. Since 24.11.2016 the said hand-set of the complainant is lying in the custody of the opposite party Qarmatek Services Pvt. Ltd.while made contact with the O.P Qarmatek Services Pvt. Ltd they have denied on having any liability to repair the damage. The O.P. Xiomi Technology India Private Ltd, Bangalore is the manufacturer of the Mobile hand-set
to O.P Qarmatek Services Pvt. Ltd as the authorized service center. So, there is negligence in service for violation of the terms and conditions of the company while purchased. Thus the complainant is entitled to get refund of the price of mobile and claimed a sum of Rs.50,000/- towards mental pain, agony and sufferings. More-so, they have claimed litigation cost of the instant case borne by the complainant.
The O.P. Xiomi Technology India Private Ltd, Bangalore has filed Written version stating, inter alia, that after examining and reviewing Mi Mobile set at the service center it was found that the Mobile-set had suffered damage. On 24.11.2016 the complainant approached “Pick ME”, the technician of authorized service centre duly received the mobile-set to repair the mobile .
Having regard to the pleadings supported by documents it appears to this Consumer Dispute Forum that the complainant purchased the mobile hand-set at Rs.13,999/- on 12.10.2015. Several correspondence was made by the complainant with the Xiomi Technology India Private Ltd, Bangalore being manufacturer and the service center Qarmatek Services Pvt. Ltd, but they have made unwarranted charge of Rs.17,194/-. In other words, the O.P. with mala fide intention had charged more than the value of the Mi Mobile hand-set. So the complainant is a customer. There is deficiency of service from the end of the O.P. It is fact that if there is any touch screen problem, then that it could be sorted out when the mobile hand-set was having touch-screen problem. The O.P Qarmatek Services Pvt. Ltd, should have repaired the same and sent back the Mobile to the complainant. It is serious lapse for dilly-dally tactics followed by Qarmatek Services Pvt. Ltd being the authorized service repairing center of Xiomi Technology India Private Ltd, Bangalore. The complainant has suffered too much. Ultimately he was forced to take shelter of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum. It is the duty, liability and responsibility of the authorized service center to repair the mobile, but they could not deny the responsibility in repairing the mobile on the plea that the mobile hand-set had suffered physical damage. In the interest of public service they could not charge more than the amount of purchase rate by the complainant. Facts & circumstances warrant that the Ld. Counsel for the manufacturer has fairly submitted before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum that they will provide higher rate value and latest version of Mi Mobile hand-set above the estimated cost of Rs. 17,194/- given by the O.P Xiomi Technology India Private Ltd. Due to his fair submission this Consumer Forum has refrained from awarding compensation to the complainant by the O.P manufacturer and its authorized service center, but they will pay litigation cost of Rs.1,000/- as token amount borne by the complainant for being harassed year after year. The complainant has attended the Court day to day and engaged advocate and provided his fee. Therefore, there is inherent laches and negligence in harassing the complainant for repairing the mobile hand-set. The contention of the complainant against the O.P has been provide when Qarmatek Services Pvt. Ltd being authorized service center could not enhance the amount from time to time for repairing new Mobile hand-set within the warranty period.
In the result, the case succeeds.
Accordingly, it is
O R D E R E D :-
That the case be and the same is allowed on contest against the O.P Manager-in-Charge, Xiomi Technology India Private Ltd. The O.P is hereby directed to send the hand-set of higher grade and latest Mobile version valued above Rs.17,194/- to the complainant through his advocate Shri Satyaki Basu within one month from the date hereof, failing which 12% interest will be given on the awarded amount. Moreover, the O.P shall pay a sum of Rs.1,000/- towards litigation cost to the complainant against proper receipt. Such hand-set be sent to the complainant through his Ld. Counsel, by the O.P, Manager-in-Charge, Xiomi Technology India Private Ltd, Bangalore, Karnataka.
