By. Sri. P. Raveendran, Member:-

Brief of the complaint:- On 11/03/2011 the complainant purchased a mobile phone from opposite party No.1 for an amount of Rs.2,100/-. Due to defects the mobile set entrusted with opposite party No.1 for repair on 30.07.2011. Thereafter several times the complainant went to the office of the opposite party. At last the opposite party No.1 given a mobile set to the complainant. He inspected the mobile set and found that is not his mobile set. So he did not accepted the mobile set. At that time the opposite party No.1 told that the rectified mobile set will be given to the complainant without further delay. But till date the complainant has not received the mobile set. Hence it is prayed to give direction to the opposite parties to pay Rs.2,100/-, the cost of the mobile set and compensation of Rs.2,000/- to the complainant.

2. Opposite party No.1 appeared and filed his version. In the version he admitted that on 11.03.2011 the complainant purchased a mobile set from him for an amount of Rs.2,100/-. Other contention in the complaint is denied by the opposite parties. The complainant approached this opposite party and complained that the display on mobile set. So the opposite party taken the complainant to the 2^nd opposite party is an authorized service centre of Videocon company and entrusted the phone for repair. On 30.07.2011 the complainant obtained the repaired mobile set from opposite party No.2. Thereafter the complainant approached this opposite party and complained that the phone is not working. On verification it is found that the circuit of the mobile is complained. So the entire handset is changed and asked the complainant to take back the mobile set. At that time the complainant told that this is not his mobile set and he thrown the mobile set and left the place this is the fact. Hence there is no deficiency in service on the part of the 1^st opposite party. Hence the complaint may be dismissed with the cost of opposite party No.1.

3. On considering the complaint and version the following points are to be considered:-

1. Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite Parties?

2. Relief and Cost.

4. Point No.1:- To prove complainant's case he has filed his proof affidavit and also produced Ext.A1 and A2 documents. Ext.A1 shows that the complainant has purchased a mobile set for Rs.2,100/- from opposite party No.1 on 11.03.2011. Ext.A2 shows that the set entrusted with opposite party No.1 for service but it was not returned to the complainant after curing its defects. It is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. Point No.1 is found accordingly.

5. Point No.2:- The set is entrusted with opposite party on 30.07.2011 and complainant had purchased another mobile set for his use. Hence he is entitled to get the cost of the mobile set ie Rs.2,100/-. He is also entitled to get Rs.1,500/- as cost and compensation. Point No.2 is found accordingly.

In the result the complaint is partly allowed the opposite parties are directed to pay an amount of Rs.2,100/- (Rupees Two Thousand and One Hundred Only) the cost of the mobile set and Rs.1,500/- (Rupees One Thousand and Five Hundred Only) as cost and compensation. This is to be complied by the opposite parties within 30 days from the date of receipt of this Order.

Pronounced in Open Forum on this the day of 23^rd June 2012.

Date of Filing:21.11.2011.