Tamil Nadu

Nagapattinam

CC/44/2014

R. Stalin - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Proprietor, New Waves Complete Mobile Solution Center - Opp.Party(s)

S. Sanmugam

29 Dec 2014

ORDER

   Date of Filing     : 05.11.2014

                                                                                         Date of Disposal: 29.12.2014

           

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,

NAGAPATTINAM

 

PRESENT: THIRU.P.G.RAJAGOPAL, B.A.B.L.,         …..PRESIDENT

    THIRU.A.BASHEER AHAMED,B.Com., …. MEMBER I

                   Tmt. R.GEETHA, B.A.,                             …. MEMBER II

 

CC. No. 44/2014

 

DECIDED ON THIS 29^th DAY OF DECEMBER 2014.

 

R.Stalin,

S/o  Rathnam

No.24, South Street,

Manaloor Village, Manakkunndu Post,

Valangaiman Taluk & Munsif,

Tiruvarur District.                                                      … Complainant

                                                                                      

                                                                /versus/

 

The Proprietor,

New Waves Complete Mobile

Solution Centre,

Nagapattinam.                                                          … Opposite party

 

                   

 

            This complaint having come up for final hearing before us on 26.12.2014 on perusal of the material records and on hearing the arguments of Thiru.S.Shanmugam, Counsel for the complainant, the opposite party having been set exparte and having stood for consideration, till this day the Forum passed the following

ORDER.

     By the President, Thiru.P.G.Rajagopal, B.A.B.L., 

          This complaint is filed by the complainant u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986. 

 

                          2. The gist of the complaint filed by the complainant is that he gave his Samsung 5130 model Mobile phone to the opposite party for rectifying the repair in it on 19.10.2013, paid Rs.550/- towards repairing charges and received the job card. Despite his repeated requests to the opposite party the latter has failed to rectify the repair and return to the complainant.  It is deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party. Even for the notice dated 14.03.2014 to the opposite party asking for the return of the Samsung Mobile phone under the registered post with acknowledgment due, the opposite party having received it on 15.03.2014, has neither sent any reply nor returned the mobile phone.  Hence the complainant prays for an order to direct the opposite party to return the mobile after rectifying the repair, to repay Rs.20,000/- towards compensation for the mental agony, hardship and expenditure incurred by him, Rs.5,000/- towards litigation expenses and to grant such and other reliefs as this Hon’ble Forum may deem fit.

                        3. Eventhough the opposite party has received the notice of this complaint on 08.11.2014, he had not appeared before this Forum to file his objections and hence he was set exparte on 09.12.2014.  The complainant filed his proof affidavit in support of his claim and 3 documents which are marked as Exhibits A1 to A3. The complainant has filed his written arguments too.

4. Points for consideration:-

1. Whether there is deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party?

                       2. Whether the complainant is entitled to any relief? If so to what?

 

                        5. Point 1: Exhibit A1, is the copy of the notice sent by the complainant to the opposite party under the registered post, Exhibit A2, is the job card given by the opposite party to the complainant and Exhibit A3, is the postal acknowledgement card for the receipt of the notice  by the opposite party. The proof affidavit as well as the Exhibits filed by the complainant very well establish the deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party.  He has failed to return the Samsung Mobile phone model 5130, after rectifying the repair. The opposite party has not even chosen to send reply to the Exhibit A1, the notice sent by the complainant to him.  Further the very absence of the opposite party before this Forum and the consequential exparte order passed against him, make it clear that he has got no defence to make against the allegations made by the complainant in his complaint.  Therefore this Forum finds deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party.

                        6. Point 2: In the result, the complaint is allowed.  The opposite party is directed to return the Samsung Mobile 5130 model entrusted by the complainant to him, after rectifying the repair therein, to pay Rs.20,000/-(Rupees twenty thousand only) towards compensation for the mental agony, hardship and inconvenience caused to him within 30 days from the date of this order failing which the said sum of Rs.20,000/- shall also carry an interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of this order till the date of its realization. The opposite party is further directed to pay a sum of Rs.5,000/-(Rupees five thousand only) towards cost of this litigation to the complainant.

This order is dictated by me to the Steno-Typist, transcribed and typed by him, corrected and pronounced by me on this  29^th   day of  December 2014.

 

 

MEMBER I                                    MEMBER II                                        PRESIDENT

List of documents filed by the complainant

 

Ex/A1.Dt.14.03.2014: The Xerox copy of the notice sent by the complainant to the

   opposite party.

Ex/A2.Dt.18.10.2013: The Xerox copy of the Job Card given by the opposite party to the

   complainant.

Ex/A3.Dt.15.03.2014: The Xerox copy of the acknowledgment card received by the

    opposite party.

 

 

MEMBER I                                    MEMBER II                                        PRESIDENT

 

 

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES

REDRESSAL FORUM,

NAGAPATTINAM.

 

CC.No.44/2014

Order Dt.:29.12.2014.