Andhra Pradesh

Chittoor-II at triputi

CC/46/2018

K.Suneetha, W/o K.Bhaskar Naidu - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Proprietor, GAJA Mobiles, Sales and service - Opp.Party(s)

B.Sekhar Reddy

15 Nov 2018

ORDER

         

 

                                                                                                                                Filing Date: 31-05-2018                                                                                                                                                                           Order Date: 15-11-2018

 

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II, CHITTOOR AT TIRUPATI.

Present: - Sri. T.Anand, President (FAC)

                                                                                               Smt. T.Anitha, Member

 

THURSDAY THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER, TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHTEEN

 

C.C.No.46/2018

Between

 Smt. K. Suneetha, W/o. Sri. K. Bhaskar Naidu,

Hindu, aged about 41 years,

D.No. 19-9-7 B 4 Kenndy Nagar,

TIRUPATI – 517 501, Chittoor District (AP).                          … Complainant

 

And

The Proprietor, GAJA MOBILES, Sales and Service,

18-2-292/B28, Madhura Nagar, Leela Mahal Road,

Opposite New Fish Market,

TIRUPATI – 517 501, Chittoor District (AP)

Phone No. 0877-6451666; Cell: 9000413171.                          … Opposite party

 

         This complaint coming on before us for final hearing on 01.11.2018 and upon perusing the complaint and other relevant material papers on record and on hearing of             Sri. B.Sekhara Reddy, counsel for the complainant, and opposite party is remained exparte having stood over till this day for consideration, the Forum made the following.

ORDER

DELIVERED BY SMT. T. ANITHA, MEMBER

ON BEHALF OF THE BENCH

        This complaint is filed by the complainant under Section 12(1) of the Consumer Protection Act 1986, complaining the deficiency in service on part of the opposite party and prayed this Forum to direct the opposite party to refund the cost of the iPhone-6 of Rs. 28,000/- which includes 5% VAT of Rs.1333.33Ps along with interest at 24 percent per annum from the date of handing over the mobile till realization and to pay damages of Rs.5,000/- for mental agony and to pay Rs. 6,000/- towards costs of the litigation.

        2. The brief facts of the case are: the complainant who is a housewife got mobile phone of iPhone with IMEI No. 359220072886824 purchased under invoice No. SI/VZG1/941 Inv. Dt. 23.04.2017 in M/SLOT Mobiles Pvt Ltd No. 30-15-135 Allipuram Daba Gardens Vizag, which was purchased by her cousin Mr. N. Vinod and gifted to her. The complainant further submits that on 21.08.2017 as there was iPhone speaker problem, she approached to GAJA MOBILES Sales and Service i.e. opposite party to rectify the same. The opposite party gave a receipt and promised to repair and rectify the defect in the iPhone. But immediately in the morning on 22.08.2017 the very next day she approached the very same employee of the shop to whom the iPhone was handed over asking to return the phone as her children  informed  her that the said iPhone will be repair only in the authorized service centre. Hence she demanded the opposite party to return the mobile. But the employee had replied to the complainant that the said piece had already been sent elsewhere for repairs and after receiving the same it will be given to her. After one week gap, the complainant had approached concerned employee for return of the iPhone and the concerned employee returned the iPhone in a non-functional condition. Since the iPhone was not functional, the employee had taken back the iPhone with a promise to got it repaired very soon and retained the iPhone with him. The complainant further submits that even after four (4) months,  the opposite party failed to repair the same.   Hence she approached police for help to get back the iPhone. But as per the instructions of the police the iPhone was sent to Infinite Apple Authorised Reseller, Air Byepass Road Tirupati, for opinion on the working condition of the instrument in question. The said authorized iPhone company expert gave opinion that, the iPhone in question became useless due to improper handling by persons without the skills to repair such advanced technological instruments.

          The complainant further submits that the opposite party returned the said non-functional iPhone to the complainant on 03.02.2018 in the presence of Station House Officer East Police Station Tirupati who advised the opposite party to pay back the cost of iPhone to the complainant. But the opposite party refused to pay the cost of the mobile Hence the complainant got issued legal notice to opposite party to settle the issue amicably by way of mediation within one month from the date of receipt of legal notice failing which they will be constrained to file the complaint before Consumer Forum. Even after receipt of the legal notice the opposite party failed to pay the same and reply to the legal notice given by the complainant. As the opposite party failed to rectify the defect in the said iPhone which is nothing but deficiency in service on part of the opposite party, she filed the present complaint.

         3.   After receipt of the notices issued by this Forum the opposite party called absent and remained exparte.

         4.   The complainant filed her evidence on affidavit and Ex: A1 to A5 were marked and  filed the written arguments and oral arguments were heard.

        5. Now the point for consideration is:-

           Whether there is any deficiency in service on part of the opposite party? If so, to what extent, the complainant is entitled for the reliefs sought for?

                    6.Point :-    The chief affidavit of the complainant re-iterated the contents in the complaint. The opposite party remained exparte and did not challenge the contents of the chief affidavit.  The main contention of the complainant is, she handed over the cell phone to the opposite party for repair as there was speaker problem and the opposite party received the cell phone and promised to repair the same and gave the receipt to the complainant. The opposite party handed over the cell phone which was found to be not functioning. Again she approached opposite party and opposite party received the cell phone and promised to repair the same.  But after repeated requests the opposite party did not respond to rectify the defect.  Hence she approached the police. With the initiative of the police said phone was sent to expert of iPhones to know the working condition of the phone and the experts opined that ,the cell phone became useless because of improper handling by opposite party workers due to lack of knowledge to repair advanced technology instruments.  Hence the police personnel advised the opposite party to refund the price of cell phone for which the opposite party refused. Hence she filed the complaint.

                     The complainant has not purchased the cell phone for pleasure and there is also no reason to hold that the complainant has unnecessarily complained the defect in the cell phone.  If really, that is so, the opposite party could have appeared and demonstrated that the cell phone in question is in perfect condition.  As the opposite party failed to appear and oppose the contentions of the complainant, the allegation of deficiency of service stands to be proved. Accordingly this complaint is to be allowed.

         In the result, the complaint is allowed in part directing the opposite party to refund the cost of the mobile of Rs.28,000/- (Rupees twenty eight thousand only) which includes VAT of 5% subject to the condition that the complainant shall return the mobile device with invoice and other documents if any to the opposite party at the time of receiving the cost of the device. The opposite party further directed to pay a sum of Rs.3,000/- (Rupees three thousand only) towards compensation for mental agony and deficiency in service and to pay a sum of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees two thousand only) towards litigation expenses. The opposite party further directed to comply with the order within six(6) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order failing which, the above said compensation amount of Rs.3,000/- (Rupees three thousand only) shall carry interest at 9 percent per annum from the date of this order till realization.

        Dictated to the stenographer, transcribed and typed by her, corrected and pronounced by me in the Open Forum this the 15^th day of November, 2018.

            Sd/-                                                                                                       Sd/- 

    Lady Member                                                                                                President (FAC)

 

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

 

Witnesses Examined on behalf of Complainant/s.

 

PW-1:  Smt. K. Suneetha (Chief Affidavit filed).

 

Witnesses Examined on behalf of Opposite PartY/S.

 

-NIL-

 

EXHIBITS MARKED ON BEHALF OF THE COMPLAINANT/s

 

Exhibits (Ex.A)	Description of Documents
	Original copy of Smart Mobile Shoppe Credit Bill/ Invoice for Rs. 28,000/- bearing No. SI/VZG1/941. Dt: 23.04.2017.
	Original copy of Gaja Mobiles Receipt No.619, for Rs. 400/-.  Dt: 21.08.2017.
	Legal Notice. Dt: 08.02.2018.
	Photo copy of Aadhaar Card bearing No.2017 5249 0184.
	Photo inset of I Phone 6 32 GB given by Febilash (Photo copies 5 in Number).

 

EXHIBITS MARKED ON BEHALF OF THE OPPOSITE PARTY/s

 

                                                                                                           NIL

 

                                                                            Sd/-

                                                                                                           President (FAC)

 

// TRUE COPY //

// BY ORDER //

 

Head Clerk/Sheristadar,

            Dist. Consumer Forum-II, Tirupati.

 

Copies to:  1) The Complainant

                  2) The Opposite party.