DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM PALAKKAD
Dated this the 29th day of June 2018
Present : Smt.Shiny.P.R. President
: Smt.Suma.K.P. Member Date of filing: 12/03/2018
: Sri.V.P.Anantha Narayanan, Member
(CC/40/2018)
M.Sreedharanunni,
S/o M.Krishnan Kutty Nair,
Souparnika, SRC.80,
Manappullikavu,
Palakkad - 678 013. - Complainant
(By Party in person)
V/s
1. Managing Director,
Samsung India Electronics Private Limited, - Opposite parties
A-25, Ground Floor, Front Tower,
Mohan Coperative Industrial Estate,
New Delhi.
2. The Manager,
Samsung Service Centre, 0005380157,
Blue Point, 12/657 (6), 1st Floor,
MS Business, Palakkad – 678 001.
3. The Manager,
Samsung Smart Phone cafe’s,
CM Enterprises, CSI Complex,
Near Mission School Junction,
T.B.Road, Palakkad.
O R D E R
By Smt.Suma.K.P. Member
The complainant had purchased a Samsung brand mobile phone for Rs.20,900/- from the 3rd opposite party on 03.09.2017 with a one year warranty (upto 02.09.2018). On 19th February 2018 the mobile handset display was found to be completely blank. On the next day, on 20th February 2018 the complainant had visited the 2nd opposite party, who is the service centre at Palakkad for its repair. Though the mobile hand set comes under warranty period, the 2nd opposite party refused to repair under free of cost on the prejudice assumption that the display darkness will be caused only due to some damage caused to mobile and not due to any malfunctioning of the components. From the service centre premises, the complainant contacted the Samsung customer service toll free number and complained this matter to them and they told him to hand over the phone to the service centre manager. Only then the service centre person took the phone for service and issue him a service acknowledgement of service request letter vide bill number 4255283036 on 20.02.2018. On 23.02.2018, the 2nd opposite party called upon the complainant, and told him that the LCD pannel is to be repaired, for which they will charge the cost of the spare parts. The complainant had informed about the same to Samsung customer support centre on 23.02.2018 by way of e mail. He then got a reply from Sree.Nitish Sharma, Technical Support Team, which was also not satisfactory to the complainant. The complainant had frequently contacted Samsung customer toll free number and they told him that inside damage will not come under warranty support. On 07.03.2018 the complainant went to the service centre and took back his mobile. Estimate for repair cost for Rs.4,613.28/- was given to the complainant by the 2nd opposite party. The complainant alleges that any kind of deliberate/accidental damages was caused to his mobile from his side. It is very clear that there is no kind of visible outer damage caused to the mobile. He further submits that the problem to the mobile handset is clearly due to some kind of manufacturing/malfunctioning of the components in the unit and not due to his improper usage. He also submit that inaddition to the difficulties faced by him due to the non working of mobile, the harassment and indifferent attitude of the 2nd opposite party/company persons had caused mental agony to him. He also submit that the way in which how to keep away from the warranty obligations and to trouble the customer is not at all expected from such a brand value and high advertising company. Hence, he had approach before this Forum seeking an order to direct the opposite parties to repair the mobile under warranty free of cost by replacing with new battery and also to provide additional one year warranty for the new battery thus issued. Failure for the same demands of opposite parties to refund the cost of mobile of Rs.20,900/- (Rupees twenty thousand nine hundred only) for which he had purchase the mobile as per the bill with additional amount of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only) towards compensation for the difficulties faced by him by ignoring his genuine complainant and the mental agony caused thereon.
Notice was issued to the opposite parties for appearance. Opposite party 1 proposed appearance through counsel. 2nd opposite party remained absent inspite of accepting notice from the Forum. Hence he was called absent and set ex-parte. Since no vakkalath was filed by the counsel who proposed for opposite party 1, they were also called absent and set ex-parte. Notice to 3rd opposite party was also reported to be delivered by the postal authorities on enquiry, hence they were called absent and set ex-parte.
Complainant filed chief affidavit alongwith documents. The documents were marked as Exts.A1 to A4. The defective mobile handset was produced before the Forum and was marked as MO1. Evidence was closed and matter was heard.
The following issues that arise for consideration are.
- Whether there is any deficiency of service from the part of opposite parties?
- If so, what are the relief and cost?
Issues No.1 & 2
We have perused the affidavit as well as Exhibits produced before the Forum. From Ext.A1 it is obvious that the complainant had purchased the mobile handset from the 3rd opposite party on 03.09.2017. The Ext.A2 receipt issued by 2nd opposite party shows that they had demanded Rs.4,613.28/- as repair charges on 20th February, 2018 which means the mobile handset is under warranty period. There is no visible physical damage to the mobile handset or to the screen portion of the MO1 produced before the Forum. On perusing Ext.A4 it is viewed that the opposite parties had demanded charges for the service on the basis that the device is physically damaged. The MO1 which was produced before the Forum was free from any sought of physical damage of to the screen portion. The opposite parties had deliberately refused to repair the MO1 of the complainant and had demanded charges for the same even under the warranty period. This amounts to deficiency of service on their part.
Hence, the complaint is allowed and we direct the opposite parties jointly and severally to repair the mobile handset free of cost under working condition within one month from the date of receipt of this order along with compensation of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only) for the mental agony suffered by the complainant and also Rs.2,000/- (Rupees two thousand only) towards cost of this proceedings. On failure of the above order within one month the opposite party shall refund the cost of the mobile of Rs.20,900/- (Rupees twenty thousand nine hundred only) along with compensation of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only) towards mental agony suffered by the complainant and also Rs.2,000/- (Rupees two thousand only) towards cost of this proceedings. The opposite parties can take back the mobile handset by comply the above order.
The aforesaid amount shall be paid within one month from the date of receipt of this order; failing which the complainant is entitled to realize 9% interest p.a from the opposite party on the total amount due to him from the date of this order till realization.
Pronounced in the open court on this the 29th day of June 2018.
Sd/-
Shiny.P.R
President
Sd/-
Suma.K.P
Member
Sd/-
V.P.Anantha Narayanan
Member
Appendix
Exhibits marked on the side of complainant
Ext.A1 - Original Tax Invoice Receipt dated.03.09.2017 issued by CM Enterprises,
CSI Shopping Complex, T.B.Road, Palakkad to the complainant.
Ext.A2 - Original Estimation dated.20.02.2018 issued by Blue Point (Samsung
Service Centre), M-5 Business Centre, H.P.O Road, Near H.P.O, Palakkad to
the complainant.
Ext.A3 - Copy of reply through e mail datecd.23.02.2018 to the complainant issued
by Samsung Customer Support Centre.
Ext.A4 - Copy of reply through e mail to the complainant issued by Samsung
Customer Support Centre.
MO1 - Disputed Mobile handset.
Exhibits marked on the side of Opposite parties
Nil
Witness examined on the side of complainant
Nil
Witness examined on the side of opposite parties
Nil
Cost
Rs.2,000/-
