Karnataka

Chitradurga

CC/81/2017

Sri.M.T.Chandrashekar S/o Thimmareddy - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Properitor/The Authorised Signatory,Vitrag Mobiles and Service - Opp.Party(s)

Sri.C.J.Lakshminarasimha

28 Dec 2017

ORDER

COMPLAINT FILED ON:09.08.2017

DISPOSED      ON:28.12.2017

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHITRADURGA.

 

CC.NO: 81/2017

 

DATED:  28^th OCTOBER 2017

PRESENT: - SRI. T.N. SREENIVASAIAH  : PRESIDENT                                   B.A., LL.B.,

                   SRI. N. THIPPESWAMY               :MEMBER

                                 B.A., LL.B.,   

……COMPLAINANT	M.T. Chandrashekar S/o Thimmareddy, Teacher, A.K. Colony, Molkalmuru Taluk, Chitradurga District.      (Rep by Sri.C.J. Lakshminarasimha, Advocate)
V/S
…..OPPOSITE PARTIES	1.The Proprietor/Authorized Signatory, Vitrag Mobiles and Service, Jain Building, B.D. Road, Chitradurga.   2. The Authorized Signatory, Intex, Intex Technologies (India) Ltd., Taj Mobile Service Centre, Vasavi Mahal Road, Utsavamba Jewellery, Chitradurga.   3. The Authorized Officer/The Authorized Signatory, C & F Leo Mobile Service, No.71/49, 2nd Main, 7th Cross, Police Station Road, Wilson Garden, Bangalore-27.   (OP No.1 & 2 in person OP No.3 ex-parte)

ORDER

SRI. T.N. SREENIVASAIAH    : PRESIDENT

The above complaint has been filed by the complainant u/Sec.12 of the C.P Act, 1986 for the relief to direct the OPs to refund the handset price of Rs.9,300/- along with interest @ 2% p.m, Rs.20,000/- towards mental agony and Rs.25,000/- towards legal notice charges and such other reliefs.

2.     The brief facts of the case of the above complainant are that, he purchased one Intex mobile i.e., Intex S-7 pm 18.09.2016 from OP No.1 by paying Rs.9,300/- with warranty period of one year from the date of purchase.  It is further submitted that, after 5-6 months, the said mobile handset started giving problem of overheating, not charging properly, hanging and when using the internet the handset not working properly, suddenly the handset switched off and switched on and other unexplained critical problems. Because of manufacturing defects, the complainant could not able to use the handset up to his satisfaction, the same has been complained to the OP No.1, in turn the OP No.1 directed the complainant to approach OP No.2, the Service Centre for rectification of the said problem.   After receiving the handset for repair on 18.03.2017 and also on 08.06.2017 respectively.  OP No.2 stated that, they have repaired the same. The complainant has used the handset after repair but, the same problem arise again and again.   In that situation, complainant has approached OP No.2.  The OP No.2 informed the same to the OP No.3.  But, till today the OPs have failed to rectify the problems found in the handset, which is a deficiency of service on the part of OPs.   Thereafter, complainant has sent a legal notice through RPAD to OPs, but they have neither replied to the said notice nor rectified the terms of the notice till today.   The cause of action for this complaint arisen on at Chitradurga when the OP No.1 has sold and supplied the defective mobile handset to the complainant and after legal notice sent to the OPs. Therefore, prayed for allowing the complaint.      

3.     Inspite of service of notice, OPs 1 and 2 appeared in person but they have not filed any version or affidavit before this Forum.  In spite of service of notice OP No.3 did not appear before this Forum and hence OP No.3 has placed ex-parte. 

 4.    Complainant has examined as PW-1 by filing affidavit evidence and the documents Ex.A-1 to A-5 were got marked.

5.     Arguments heard. 

6.     Now the points that arise for our consideration for decision of above complaint are that;

(1)  Whether the complainant proves that the OPs have committed deficiency of service in supplying the defective mobile to him and entitled for the reliefs as prayed for in the above complaint?

              (2) What order?

        7.     Our findings on the above points are as follows:-

        Point No.1:- Partly in Affirmative.

        Point No.2:- As per final order.

REASONS

8.     It is not in dispute that, complainant has purchased one Intex S-7 mobile hand set on 18.09.2016 from OP No.1 by paying Rs.9,300/- which  covers warranty of one year  as per Ex.A-2.   The contention taken by the complainant that, after 5-6 months from the date of purchase, the said mobile handset started giving problem i.e., overheating, not charging properly, hanging and when using the internet the handset not working properly.  But, the OPs have not come forward to disprove the same before this Forum. 

9.     Ex.A-1 clearly shows that, the complainant has purchased one mobile handset from the OP No.1 by paying a sum of Rs.9,300/- under Cash Bill dated 18.09.2016.  The complainant approached the OPs and requested to rectify the problems occurred in the mobile handset.  But, OP No.1told the complainant to approach the OP No.2 for rectification of the problems found with the OP No.2.  OP No.2 has repaired the hand set but, after few days, the same problems found in the handset.  Then the complainant approached OP No.2 by that time, OP No.2 told that, there is a manufacturing defect in the mobile.  OP No.3 is the held responsible to rectify the said mobile handset though the same was under warranty period. Therefore, there is a deficiency in service on the part of OPs. 

10.   On hearing the contention of complainant and on perusal of the document including the affidavit, it clearly made out from the documents that, the complainant has paid Rs.9,300/- for purchasing the mobile handset from the OP No.1.  After using the said mobile handset for 5-6 months, some defects found in the said handset.  The complainant approached the OPs for rectifying the same.  The OPs failed to repair the same.  Due to the defects in the handset, the complainant has suffered mentally and financially for selling of the defective mobile handset to the complainant by OPs, which caused mental agony and financial loss, which cannot be compensated by the OPs unless on payment of compensation.  The complainant has proved that, the OP No.1 has sold the defective mobile handset to the complainant, manufactured by OP No.3.  On considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Forum has come to the conclusion that, the complainant is entitled to receive the price of the mobile i.e., Rs.9,300/-, Rs.10,000/- towards mental agony and Rs.5,000/-towards cost is just and proper.   Therefore, we come to the conclusion that, there is a deficiency of service on the part of OPs No.1 and 3.  Accordingly, this Point No.1 is held as partly affirmative to the complainant.

 

          11.     Point No.2:- As discussed on the above point and for the reasons stated therein we pass the following:-

 

ORDER

 

The complaint filed by the complainant U/s 12 of CP Act 1986 is partly allowed.

It is ordered that, the OP No.1 to 3 are hereby directed to pay a sum of Rs.9,300/-, the cost of the mobile along with interest @ 9% p.a from 18.09.2016 till realization.

It is further ordered that the OP No.1 to 3 are hereby directed to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards mental agony and Rs.5,000/- towards costs.

It is further ordered that, the OPs are hereby directed to comply the above order within 30 days from the date of this order.

            (This order is made with the consent of Member after the correction of the draft on 28/12/2017 and it is pronounced in the open Court after our signatures)

           

                                     

 MEMBER                                                   PRESIDENT

 

-:ANNEXURES:-

Witnesses examined on behalf of Complainant:

PW-1:  Complainant by way of affidavit evidence.

Witnesses examined on behalf of OPs:

-Nil-

Documents marked on behalf of Complainants:

01	Ex-A-1:-	Bill dated 18.09.2016
02	Ex.A-2:-	Job Card dated 18.03.2017
03	Ex.A-3:-	Job Card dated 08.06.2017
04	Ex.A-4:-	Legal Notice dated 29.06.2017
05	Ex.A-5:-	Postal acknowledgements

 

Documents marked on behalf of OPs:

-Nil-

 

MEMBER                                                            PRESIDENT

Rhr**