By. Smt. Renimol Mathew, Member:-
The complaint is filed under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act for an order directing the opposite parties to repair the defective mobile phone or to return the price of mobile phone with cost and compensation.
2. Brief of the complaint:- On March 2014 complainant purchased a Sony C6602 mobile handset from shop of 1st opposite party. While he was using the said handset, its touch screen broken and on 09.07.2014 complainant entrusted the set together with bill and Warranty card to 2nd opposite party. Thereafter two months 2nd opposite party not repaired the defective handset and demanded Rs.12,995/- as repair charge. On 19.09.2014 complainant has given the amount asked by the 2nd opposite party by way of Demand Draft. Even after the receipt of the amount 2nd opposite party has not delivered the repaired handset and demanded another Rs.14,000/- to modify the handset. According to the complainant this is deficiency of service and unfair trade practice from the part of opposite parties. Hence filed this complaint.
3. On being served, opposite parties not appeared before the Forum. Hence they set ex-parte and proceeded with the case.
4. On considering the complaint and documents the Forum raised the following points for consideration:-
1. Whether there is any deficiency of service from the part of opposite parties?
2.Relief and Cost.
5. Point No.1:- Complainant filed affidavit and examined as PW1. Produced documents were marked as Ext.A1 and A2. Ext.A1 is the Job Sheet dated 09.07.2014. Ext.A2 is the copy of the Demand Draft dated 19.09.2014. On going through the documents, Forum finds that on 09.07.2014 complainant entrusted the defective handset to the service centre. Thereafter on 19.09.2014 complainant paid Rs.14,000/- to Sony India Private Limited by way of Demand Draft as repair charge. The complaint is filed on 24.02.2015, till this date complainant not received the repaired handset. There is no evidence to the contrary. Hence Forum finds that there is deficiency of service from the part of the opposite parties. The Point No.1 is found accordingly.
6. Point No.2:- Since the Point No.1 is found in favour of the complainant, the complainant is entitled to get cost and compensation. The Point No.2 is decided accordingly.
In the result, the complaint is partly allowed and opposite party No.2 is directed to return the repaired handset within 30 days on receipt of this Order and opposite party No.2 is also directed to pay Rs.7,000/- (Rupees Seven Thousand) only as cost and compensation. This Order must be complied by the opposite party No.2 within 30 days otherwise the opposite parties are directed to return Rs.36,000 + 12,995 = 48,995/- (Rupees Forty Eight Thousand Nine Hundred and Ninety Five) only with ordered cost and compensation with 10% interest till payment.
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by him and corrected by me and Pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 28th day of May 2015.
Date of Filing:24.02.2015. PRESIDENT :Sd/-
MEMBER :Sd/-
MEMBER :Sd/-
/True Copy/
Sd/-
PRESIDENT, CDRF, WAYANAD.
APPENDIX.
Witness for the complainant:-
PW1. Rajesh Kuruvila (Affidavit). Complainant.
Witness for the Opposite Parties:-
Nil.
Exhibits for the complainant:
A1. Service Job Sheet.
A2. Copy of Demand Draft. Dt:19.09.2014.
Exhibits for the opposite parties:-
Nil.
Sd/-
PRESIDENT, CDRF, WAYANAD.
a/-
