Per Sri A. Hazarath Rao,  President:-    The complainant filed this complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act seeking replacement of mobile or return of Rs.4,500/- being cost of the mobile; Rs.50,000/- towards mental agony and Rs.10,500/- towards legal expenses.

2.  In brief the averments of the complaint are these:

        The complainant on 23-10-11 purchased a mobile phone model No.K1616 of Karbon company for Rs.4,500/- with Phone No.911124350427650.  The opposite party issued a bill and warranty on the same day.     The said mobile did not function properly even before the opposite party received the amount paid by the complainant under credit card.  The complainant brought the same to the notice of the opposite party.   The complainant handed over the said mobile at the advice of the opposite party in service centre  for which it gave a receipt promising to return the mobile within two or three days.   The opposite party failed either to replace the mobile or get it repaired.   The complainant gave a registered notice to the opposite party for which there was no reply.  Supplying a defective set to the complainant amounted to deficiency of service.   The complaint therefore be allowed.

3.   The opposite party after receipt of summons remained exparte.      

4.    Exs.A-1 to A-6 were marked on behalf of the complainant.

5.    Now the points that arose for consideration in this complaint are:

1. Whether the opposite party committed deficiency of service?
2. Whether the complainant is entitled to compensation and if so to what amount?
3. To what relief?

6.   POINT No.1:-   Ex.A-1 bill dated 25-10-11 revealed that the complainant purchased K1616 mobile, 911124350427650 for Rs.4,500/- with  Ex.A-2 warranty.    Under Ex.A-2 the warranty for the mobile (handset) is one year and six months for batteries, charges and accessories.   Under Ex.A-3 the complainant handed over the mobile to the service centre of Karbon mobiles on 23-11-11.  On seeing Exs.A-1 and A-3 one can come to a conclusion that the mobile purchased under Ex.A-1 did not function properly.   The complainant also issued Ex.A-5 notice on 23-01-12.   The opposite party received Ex.A-5 on 25-01-12.   A minimum courtesy is required by the opposite party to give response to the grievance of the complainant.   The contention of the complainant regarding defect of mobile remained uncontraverted.   We therefore opine that the opposite party committed deficiency of service.   We therefore answer this point against the opposite party.  

7.  POINT No.2:-   The Complainant claimed Rs.50,000/- as damages for mental agony.   It is the contention of the complainant that he is working as Deputy Manager, SBI, Arundelpet, Guntur. Ex.A-4 revealed that the complainant purchased another mobile on 07-12-11 from                M/s Hari Electricals and Electronics.   The amount claimed and to be awarded as damages has to commensurate with the injury/deficiency of service complained.   Considering the case of the complainant awarding Rs.1,000/- as damages will meet ends of justice.   We therefore answer this point accordingly in favour of the complainant.

8.  POINT No.3:-   In view of above findings, in the result the complaint is partly allowed as indicated below:

1. The opposite party is directed to repair the mobile within two weeks and if the repair is not possible replace the mobile or refund Rs.4,500/- (Rupees four thousand five hundred only) together with interest @12% p.a., from 23-11-11 till realization.
2. The opposite party is directed to pay Rs.1,000/- (Rupees one thousand only) towards compensation.
3. The opposite party is directed to pay Rs.1,000/- (Rupees one thousand only) towards costs.
4. The above order should be complied within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of the order.

 Typed to my dictation by Junior Stenographer, corrected by us and pronounced in the open Forum dated this the 26^th day of March, 2012.

MEMBER                                  MEMBER                                  PRESIDENT

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

DOCUMENTS MARKED

For Complainant:

For opposite party:   NIL

                                                                                                PRESIDENT