By Sri. Mohamed Ismayil.C.V, Member
The grievances of the complainant is as follows:-
1. On 02/11/2022, the complainant had made an online order to the first opposite party to purchase a mobile phone in the brand of SAMSUNG Galaxy M32 (light blue) 128 GB, manufactured by the second opposite party. The complainant had paid Rs 14,949/- to the opposite party as the price of the mobile phone. On 05/11/2022 the complainant had received the mobile phone from the first opposite party. But after an use of nearly 10 days, the sound of mobile phone became very low. On 21/11/2022, the complainant had approached service centre of the opposite party situated at Manjeri for rectifying the defect. The service centre of the second opposite party examined the QR code of subject phone and found that another sim card was activated in the phone on 29/09/2022. It is alleged by the complainant that the first opposite party delivered an used phone instead of a new one. According to the complainant, the first opposite party cheated him by selling a used mobile phone after collecting price of a new phone. The complainant demanded the first opposite party to replace the mobile phone but instead of replacing the product, the first opposite party evaded from his responsibility on frivolous grounds. When the complainant contacted the second opposite party with his grievance, it is informed him that the first opposite party is responsible for the negligence. It is stated in the complaint that due to the negligent act of the first opposite party the complainant has suffered financial loss, mental agony and hardship. The complainant alleged that the opposite parties committed deficiency in service. The complainant prayed for a direction to the opposite parties to pay Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation for loss of time, damages including refund of Rs. 14,949/- as the price of the subject phone.
2. The complaint is admitted and issued notice to the opposite parties. But the opposite parties did not file version to contest the matter. So the Commission set the
opposite parties as exparte.
3. The complainant filed affidavit in lieu of evidence. The complainant also produced documents to support his contentions made in the complaint. The documents are marked as Ext.A1 to A4 documents. Ext.A1 document is the copy of acknowledgement of service request dated 21/11/2022 issued by the service centre of the second opposite party. Ext. A2 document is the copy of tax invoice dated 03/11/2022 issued by the first opposite party showing the price of the mobile phone. Ext.A3 document is the copy of message dated 22/11/2022 received from the first opposite party. Ext.A4 document is the copy of message dated 17/11/2022 received from the first opposite party.
4. Heard the complainant. Perused affidavit and documents. The points arisen for the consideration of the Commission are:
- Whether the opposite parties are committed deficiency in service towards the complainant?
- Relief and cost.
5.Point No 1 and 2:
It is stated in the complaint that the complainant had purchased subject mobile phone through online platform of the first opposite party and it was manufactured by the second opposite party. According to the complainant, he had remitted Rs.14,949/- to the opposite parties as the price of the mobile phone. The first opposite party delivered the phone on 05/11/2022. The complainant produced tax invoice dated 03/11/2022 issued by the first opposite party showing the price of the mobile phone and it is marked as Ext.A2 document. The grievance of the complainant is that after a short span of time, sound of the mobile phone became damaged. It is averred by the complainant that when he approached the service centre of second opposite party, he came to know that the subject mobile phone purchased from the opposite parties was an used phone. The complainant produced acknowledgement of service request issued by the service centre of the second opposite party and same is marked as Ext.A1 document. Going through Ext.A1 document the purchase date was shown as 29/09/2022. It is also found that audio of the mobile phone was defective. It is contended by the complainant that he received an used phone from the opposite parties instead of a new phone. According to the complainant he had paid for a fresh piece of mobile phone but the opposite parties delivered an used phone. As per Ext.A2 document the date of order is 02/11/2022. But, Ext.A1 document shows that the purchase date is 29/09/2022. So the Commission finds that the opposite parties sold an used mobile phone to the complainant. The complainant also produced copies of text messages sent by the first opposite party and those messages are marked as Ext.A3 and Ext. A4 documents respectively. Ext.A3 and A4 documents clearly shows that the opposite parties acted negligently towards the complainant. The complainant has sustained financial loss due to the act of opposite parties. There is no contra evidence from the side of opposite parties in this case. The opposite parties are failed to raise their contentions before the Commission. The complainant has successfully explained his case before the Commission to get an relief in his favour. On the evaluation of evidence, the deficiency of service committed by the opposite parties have come out in crystal clear. In the light of above findings, the Commission allow the complaint in the following manner:
- The opposite parties are directed to pay Rs. 50,000/-(Rupees Fifty thousand only) to the complainant as compensation for the sufferings of mental agony, hardship and loss of money due to the act of the opposite parties.
- The opposite parties are directed to pay Rs. 5,000/-(Rupees five thousand only) to the complainant as the cost of the proceedings.
The opposite parties are directed to comply this order within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order otherwise the entire amount shall carry 9% interest per annum from the date of this order till its realisation.
Dated this 31st day of May, 2023.
MOHANDASAN K., PRESIDENT
PREETHI SIVARAMAN C., MEMBER
MOHAMED ISMAYIL C.V., MEMBER
APPENDIX
Witness examined on the side of the complainant : Nil
Documents marked on the side of the complainant : Ext.A1to A4
Ext.A1 : Document is the copy of acknowledgement of service request dated
21/11/2022 issued by the service centre of the second opposite party.
Ext. A2 : Document is the copy of tax invoice dated 03/11/2022 issued by the first
opposite party showing the price of the mobile phone.
Ext.A3 : Document is the copy of message dated 22/11/2022 received from the first
opposite party.
Ext.A4 : Document is the copy of message dated 17/11/2022 received from the first
opposite party.
Witness examined on the side of the opposite party : Nil
Documents marked on the side of the opposite party : Nil
MOHANDASAN K., PRESIDENT
PREETHI SIVARAMAN C., MEMBER
MOHAMED ISMAYIL C.V., MEMBER
