DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,<br /> BATHINDA (PUNJAB)<br /> <br /> CC.No.190 of 11-8-2009<br /> Decided on: 07-10-2009<br /> <br /> Sunil Kumar son of Sh. Jagdish Rai, resident of H.No. 11872, Street No.2, Sanguana Basti, Bathinda.<br /> ………Complainant.<br /> <br /> Versus<br /> <br /> 1. The Mobile Store Ltd., Dhobi Bazar, Opp. Subhash General Store, Bathinda, through its Prop./Partner<br /> 2. Flxtronics Technologies (Pvt.), Ltd., Plot No.03, Phase-II, Sipcot Industrial Park, Kancheepuram, Distt. Tamilnadi-602106., through its M.D./Chairman.<br /> 3. Sony Ericson Mobile Communications (India) Pvt. Ltd.,4th Floor, Dakha House, 18/17, Wea Keral Bagh, New Delhi-11005, through its M.D./Chairman.<br /> ……..Opposite parties.<br /> <br /> Complaint under section 12 of<br /> the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.<br /> <br /> Present:-<br /> For the complainant : Sh. Harraj Singh, counsel for the complainant.<br /> : Opposite parties already exparties.<br /> <br /> QUORUM<br /> <br /> Sh. George, President.<br /> Sh. Amrajeet Paul, Member.<br /> <br /> ORDER<br /> <br /> GEORGE, PRESIDENT:-<br /> <br /> 1. The present complaint has been filed by the complainant under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (here-in-after referred to as ‘Act’) with allegations against the opposite parties that he had purchased a mobile handset of Sony Ericsson, Model No. W5801, Black and IMEI No. 353736021051844 from opposite party No.1 as per vide retail Invoice No. PUN/02536/00001/2954 dt. 21.01.2009 for a sale consideration of Rs. 9,489/- to opposite party No.1 on behalf of opposite parties No.2 and 3 assured one year guarantee/warranty on the said mobile handset and he was assured that in case of any complaint in the functioning of the handset, the complainant will be provided best services. Immediately, after purchase of said mobile handset, it started giving problem in functioning as there appeared fault in the screen of the mobile handset and the screen of the mobile handset used to disappear. The complainant approached the opposite party No.1 and he complained about the defect in the mobile handset. The opposite party No.1 got the same repaired, but the defect could not removed properly rather the handset continued with the same problem and ultimately he was told by the opposite party No.1 that the problem of screen of the handset is a manufacturing defect and asked the complainant that for repair of the same, he has to pay an additional amount of Rs. 3,000/-. He told opposite party No.1 that the handset is well within the guarantee period and the same has to be repaired free of cost, but the opposite parties flatly refused to repair the same rather opposite party No.1 insisted for payment of additional amount of Rs.3,000/- for repair of the handset. He made repeated requested to the opposite parties to do the needful but the opposite parties continue to linger on one or the other false pretext and therefore, he filed the present complaint. He has sought the relief with the replacement of defective handset with a new handset of the same make and a new guarantee period or opposite parties may be directed to refund the cost of the handset along with interest and compensation on account of mental tension, agony, harassment and inconvenience to the tune of Rs. 25,000/- and an amount of Rs. 3,300/- on account of forced litigation expenses.<br /> <br /> 2. During the proceedings of the case, all the three opposite parties are served but despite service. None of them appeared before this Forum to contest the allegations. Accordingly, all the three opposite parties are preceded against exparte.<br /> <br /> 3. The complainant has led exparte evidence. The complainant brought on the record, his own affidavits Ex.C-1 and Ex.C-2 and also brought on record and a copy of Invoice dt. 21.01.2009 Ex.C-3.<br /> <br /> 4. The complainant reiterated all the material facts, he has pleaded in his complaint in his own affidavits Ex.C-1 and Ex.C-2 and he also brought on the record Invoice Ex.C-3, vide which he purchased mobile handset from opposite party No.1 dt. 21.01.2009 for a total sale consideration of Rs. 9,489/-. The facts deposed by the complainant in his affidavits Ex.C-1 and Ex.C-2, remained uncontroverted and unchallenged. Accordingly, we allow the complaint and direct opposite parties as under:<br /> <br /> (i) Opposite parties shall be responsible for replacing mobile handset as referred to above or making a payment of the sale price of the handset along with interest @ 9% from the date of filing of the complaint till the amount finally paid. <br /> (ii) Opposite parties shall also pay an amount of Rs. 5,000/- as compensation to the complainant on account of mental tension, agony, harassment and inconvenience, he has suffered due to none functioning of the mobile handset.<br /> (iii) The complainant shall also entitled to cost of the litigation to the tune of <br /> Rs. 3,000/-.<br /> <br /> 5. Opposite parties shall be liable to comply this order jointly or severally.<br /> <br /> 6. The compliance of this order be made within 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.<br /> <br /> 7. The copy of this order be sent to the parties concerned free of cost and file be indexed and consigned.<br /> <br /> Pronounced (GEORGE)<br /> 7.10.2009 PRESIDENT<br /> <br /> (AMARJEET PAUL)<br /> MEMBER <br />