Present (1) Nisha Nath Ojha,
District & Sessions Judge (Retd.) President
(2) Smt. Karishma Mandal,
Member
Date of Order : 30.09.2016
Nisha Nath Ojha
- In the instant case the Complainant has sought for following reliefs against the Opposite party:-
- To direct the opposite parties to refund the price of the Black Berry Mobile Set i.e. Rs. 12,199/- (Rs. Twelve Thousand One Hundred Ninety Nine only ) including shipping charges Rs. 200/-.
- To direct the opposite parties to pay Rs. 100/- ( Rs. One Hundred only ) per day from the date of his purchase on 21.04.2011 as compensation.
- To direct the opposite parties to pay Rs. 5,000/- ( Rs. Five Thousand only ) as litigation costs.
- The facts of this case lies in a narrow compass which is as follows:-
The complainant has asserted that he has purchased a Black Berry 9530 mobile set through Naaptol against order no. 1638430 dated 15.04.2011 which was handed over to the complainant on 21.04.2011 at the cost of Rs. 12,199/- which includes shipping charge of Rs. 200/- as appears from annexure – 1.
It is further case of the complainant that after purchase of the aforesaid mobile, he inserted Sim Card of Vodafone and Airtel but the aforesaid set was not working properly as per assurance given by opposite party. Thereafter complainant has made several complaints with regard to the non - functioning of the aforesaid mobile which is mentioned in annexure – 2 and 3.
The complainant has also stated that he has purchased the aforesaid mobile on the basis of advertisement about the functioning of the aforesaid mobile which was found completely misleading and wrong.
On behalf of opposite parties a written statement has been filed stating therein that the complainant has not included the company as a party and as such this case be dismissed for mis-joinder of the parties.
It has been further stated in Para – 5 of the written statement of opposite parties that all the averment and allegation etc. made by the complainant is denied.
Heard the learned counsel for the parties perused the record.
The complainant has asserted that the aforesaid mobile was not functioning as per advertisement of opposite parties and he has been mislead by the advertisement of the opposite parties.
From perusal of annexures as well as facts asserted in the complaint petition, it is crystal clear that fact asserted on oath by the complainant has not been denied by the opposite parties with cogent documents. Instead of filing cogent evidence to show that the annexures as well as the facts mentioned in the complaint petition were not correct the opposite parties have made sweeping denial without any basis. It is true that the complainant has not made the manufacturer party but it is also a fact that the complainant has purchased the mobile due to misleading advertisement of opposite parties.
It is needless to say that it is a Consumer Forum and hence no case can be dumped on the technical ground.
For the discussion made above, we find and hold that opposite parties have committed gross deficiency by inducing the complainant in purchasing the aforesaid mobile which was not workable.
We direct the opposite party jointly and severally to return the price of mobile to the complainant i.e. Rs. 12,199/- (Rs. Twelve Thousand One Hundred Ninety Nine only ) which he has purchased vide annexure – 1 within the period of two months from date of receipt of this order or certified copy of this order failing which the opposite parties will have to pay an interest @ 10% on the aforesaid amount i.e. Rs. 12,199/- (Rs. Twelve Thousand One Hundred Ninety Nine only ) till its final payment.
Opposite parties are further directed jointly and severally to pay Rs. 5,000/- ( Rs. Five Thousand only ) to the complainant by way of compensation and litigation costs within the period of two months.
Accordingly this complaint petition stands allowed to extent referred above.
Member President
