Orissa

Rayagada

CC/143/2016

Sri A.K. Khadanga - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Manager, Somesh Cell Point - Opp.Party(s)

Self

08 Sep 2016

ORDER

DISTRICT   CONSUMER  DISPUTES REDRESSAL    FORUM, RAYAGADA

                                    C.C. Case  No.143/ 2016.

P R E S E N T .

Sri Pradeep Kumar Dash, LL.B,                             President.

Sri Gadadhara Sahu,B.Sc.,                                    Member

Sri  A.K.Khadanga, Sr.Clerk, At: Tahasil Office, P.O.Gunupur, P.S.Gunupur, Dist. Rayagada, Odisha.

                                                  ………Complainant

Vrs

1. Manager,Somesh Cell Point,At: Daily Market,Old Bus Stand,P.O/PS Gunupur,Dist.Rayagada.
2. Manager, Micromax Care Centre, M/s Orissa a?Enterprises,1^st Floor, Ananda Plaza Gandhi Nagar, Main Road, Near Sai Complex,Berhampur-2,Pin-76001.
3. General Manager, Micromax.                  

                                                                                            ……...Opp.Parties

Counsel for the Parties:

For the complainant: In Person

For the O.Ps: Sri B.S.Nayak,Advocate,Rayagada.

                                                                        JUDGMENT

                        The facts of the complaint  in brief is that,  the complainant has purchased  one  Micromax Canvas Doodle-3  mobile   from O.p. No.1 with a  consideration of Rs.6,800/- on 09.07.2015 vide money receipt No.49but  two months of  its  purchase the  mobile set  was  started giving problems and it could not be used properly for which  the complainant approached  the O.P 1  and the O.P 1 sent it to O.P 2  for rectification and it was rectified only for two months and after one month the same problem started and he further approached to O.P 2  and the O.P 2 kept the mobile for two months and returned the set without  rectification of the defect.  Hence finding no other option  the complainant  approached this forum and prayed to direct the O.ps  to  refund the cost of  the mobile  and  award compensation for mental agony . Hence, this complaint.

                         On being noticed the O.ps appeared through their advocate but not shown interest to  file 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 order.

                        ORDER

                        The  opposite parties  are directed  to  refund the cost of the mobile set  i.e. Rs.6,800/-   and pay  compensation of Rs.500/-  for mental agony undergone by the complainant and cost of Rs.500/- . 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 15^th  day of September,2016 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  Money Receipt No.49 dt.09/07/2015
2. Xerox copy of Job sheet.

By the Opp.Party: Nil

 

                                                                                                           President