Orissa

Rayagada

CC/15/28

Sri V.Gouri, S/o: V.Sankar Rao, - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Manager, OM Rayagada and others - Opp.Party(s)

Self

15 Oct 2015

ORDER

DISTRICT   CONSUMER  DISPUTES REDRESSAL    FORUM, RAYAGADA

                                            C.C. Case  No.28/ 2015.

P R E S E N T .

Sri Pradeep Kumar Dash, LL.B,                             President.

Smt. Ch.  Nirmala Kumari Raju, LLB,                    Member

V.Gouri, S/o V.Sankar Rro, Goutam Nagar, 1^st Lane, Po/Dist. Rayagada.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     ………Complainant

                                                            Vrs.

1. M/s  OM Collections, Retail Distributor & Supplier of Intex Mobile Phone,Sarala Jn. Rayagada.
2.  Manager, Sales,Service & Marketing Intex Technologies(India) Ltd.,D-18/2 Okhala Industrial Area,Phase II,Delhi-110020.

                                                                                                            ………...Opp.Parties

Counsel for the parties:

For the complainant: In Person

For the O.Ps:  Set Exparte

 

                                                            JUDGMENT

                        The facts of the complaint  in brief is that,  the complainant has purchased  one  Intex Nano 2   Mobile from O.p. No.1 with a  consideration of Rs1100/- on 08.02.2014 vide  cash memo No.2939 dt.08.02.2012 with one year warranty. During warranty period  the product started different problems and it was given for service for four times and now the mobile set is  with the dealer for getting service and not delivered back till today. At last the complainant   finding no other option approached this forum for relief  and prayed  to direct the O.Ps  to   refund the  cost of the mobile  i.e. Rs.1100/- with compensation .Hence, this complaint.

                       

                        On being noticed, neither the O.ps appeared nor filed any written version and as  the O.ps failed to appear before this forum despite service of notice, the proceeding was set exparte against them.

                        Heard and perused the complaint petition and documents filed by the complainant and we accept the grievance of the complainant. The Complainant  argued that the O.ps have sold a defective  mobile set  to the complainant and claimed that the O.ps caused deficiency in service and deprived of the complainant of enjoyment of the mobile set  since the date of  its purchase  which caused mental agony and harassment to the complainant.

Now we have to see whether there was any negligence of the Ops  in providing  after sale service  to the complainant as alleged ?

 

We perused the documents filed by the complainant.  Since the mobile set found defective after its purchase    and   the complainant  informed the Ops regarding the defect but the  Ops   failed to remove  the defect . At this stage we hold that  if the mobile set  require  servicing since  the date of its purchase, then it can be presumed that it is defective one and if the defective mobile set  is sold to the complainant , the complainant is entitled to get refund of the price of the article or to replace a new  one or  remove the defects  and also the   complainant is entitled  and has a right to claim compensation and cost to meet his mental agony , financial loss.  In the instant case  as it is appears that the mobile set  which was purchased by the complainant had developed  defects and the O.ps were unable to restore its normal functioning during the warranty period. It appears that the complainant invested  a substantial amount and purchased the mobile set  with an expectation to have the effective benefit of use of the article. In this case, the complainant was deprived of getting beneficial use of the article and deprived of using the mobile set  for such  and the defecates were not removed by the O.ps who  know the defects from time to time from the complainant.

Hence, in our view the complainant has right to claim compensation to meet  his mental agony, financial loss. Hence,  it is ordered.

 

                                                ORDER

                        The  opposite parties  are directed to  refund the cost of the mobile set  i.e. Rs.1100/-   and pay  compensation of Rs.500/-  for mental agony undergone by the complainant and cost of Rs.200/- . Further, we direct the Ops to pay the aforesaid award amount  within one month from the date of receipt of this order, failing which the O.Ps are liable to pay  interest  @  12%  p.a. on the above awarded amount till  the date of payment. Accordingly the complaint is allowed.

                        Pronounced in open forum today on this 17^th day of October,2015 under the seal and signature of this forum.

                         A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements , be forwarded to the parties    free of charge.

 

 

            Member                                                                                               President

Documents relied upon:

By the complainant:

1. Xerox copy of   Cash Memo

 

By the Opp.Party: Nil

 

                                                                                                           President