IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ALAPPUZHA
Saturday the 30th day of April, 2016
Filed on 11.01.2016
Present
1. Smt. Elizabeth George (President)
2. Sri. Antony Xavier (Member)
3. Smt. Jasmine D (Member)
in
CC/No.10/2016
Between
Complainant:- Opposite parties:-
Sri. Aneesh Varghese 1. The Manager
Naduvile Veedu YU Televentures
Thottuvathala P.O. Block A, Plot No.21/14 Kainakary, Alappuzha Naraina Industrial Area
Phase 2, Delhi – 110 028
2. M/s. Getronics
Karthika Building
Oppo. SDV School
Alappuzha
O R D E R
SMT. JASMINE D. (MEMBER)
The facts of the complaint in short are as follows:-
The complainant purchased a mobile phone for an amount of Rs.6,999/- from the first opposite party through online on 4.6.2015. The product has one year warranty. On 7.9.2015 the speaker of the said phone became defective and the complainant registered a complaint before the first opposite party. As per the intimation given by the first opposite party, the phone has sent to the first opposite party for repairing. It has been replaced by the first opposite party, but the received phone has no back panel. The replaced phone was also not working properly. Even though the defect has been intimated to the first opposite party it has not been replaced so far. The complainant sustained much mental agony and hence filed this complaint seeking refund of the price of the mobile phone together with compensation and costs.
2. Notice was served to the opposite parties. But they did not appear before the Forum, hence opposite parties were set ex-parte.
3. The complainant filed proof affidavit and documents produced were marked as Exts.A1 and A2 series. The complainant also produced the mobile phone which marked as MO1.
4. Considering the allegations of the complainant, the Forum has raised the following issues:-
1) Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties?
2) Whether the complainant is entitled to get any reliefs?
5. Points 1 and 2:- The case of the complainant is that he had purchased a mobile phone for an amount of Rs.6,999/- by the first opposite party through online. The product has one year warranty. During the warranty period the said phone became defective and the defect has been intimated to the opposite parties, but they have not replaced the mobile phone so far. Hence filed this complaint.
6. Complainant filed proof affidavit and produced the documents which were marked Exts.A1, Ext.A2 series and MO1. Ext.A1 is the copy of the invoice and Ext.A2 series are the email messages between the complainant and the first opposite party. From the documents, it is clear that the complainant purchased a mobile phone manufactured by the first opposite party for an amount of Rs.6,999/- and during the existence of the warranty, the said phone became defective and defect has been intimated to the opposite parties, but the opposite parties are failed to rectify the defect or to replace the product. The opposite parties even after getting notice from the Forum failed to attend the Forum. The allegation put forwarded by the complainant against the opposite parties stands unchallenged. The complainant proved his case by supporting evidence. Therefore we held that both opposite parties committed deficiency in service and they are liable to refund the price of the mobile phone to the complainant. So the complaint is to be allowed.
In the result, the complaint is allowed. The opposite parties 1 and 2 are directed to refund the price of the mobile phone Rs.7000/- (Rupees seven thousand only) to the complainant. The opposite parties are further directed to pay an amount of Rs.1000/- (Rupees one thousand only) towards compensation to the complainant. The complainant is directed to return the defective mobile phone to the opposite party. The order shall be complied within one month from the date of receipt of this order failing which the opposite parties shall further liable to pay interest @ 10% for the amount Rs.7000/- from the date of order till realization. There is no order as to costs.
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her corrected by me and pronounced in open Forum on this the 30th day of April, 2016.
Sd/- Smt. Jasmine.D. (Member) : .
Sd/- Smt. Elizabeth George (President):
Sd/- Sri. Antony Xavier (Member) :
Appendix:-
Evidence of the complainant:-
Ext.A1 - Copy of the invoice
Ext.A2 - Email messages
Evidence of the opposite parties:- Nil
// True Copy //
By Order
Senior Superintendent
To
Complainant/Opposite party/S.F.
Typed by:- pr/-
Compared by:-
