BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM

VAZHUTHACAUD : THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

PRESENT:

SHRI. G. SIVAPRASAD : PRESIDENT

SMT. BEENA KUMARI. : MEMBER

SMT. S.K. SREELA : MEMBER

C.C. No. 180/2010 Filed on 16/6/2010

Dated: 15..09..2010

Complainant:

Udayakumar, S/o Retnakaran, Kalluvilakathu Veedu, Kottaikkakom – P.O., Aryanadu, Nedumangad – 695 542.

(party in person)

Opposite parties:

1. Proprietor, Orbit Mobile, Kulavikonam, Nedumangad.

2. Proprietor, Minnus Mobiles, opp. Sub Jail, Attakkulangara, Thiruvananthapuram.

This O.P having been heard on 04..09..2010, the Forum on 15..09..2010 delivered the following:

ORDER

SMT. BEENA KUMARI. A., MEMBER:

Brief facts of the case are as follows:

The complainant in this case had purchased a Mobile phone from the 1^st opposite party on 25/11/2009. The price of the Karbon K-451 phone is Rs.3,100/- and he has also paid Rs.400/- for its memory card. After 28 days’ of use the said mobile phone became defective. The complainant immediately informed the matter to the 1^st opposite party – dealer. Then the 1^st opposite party directed the complainant to approach 2^nd opposite party. Accordingly the complainant met the 2^nd opposite party and handed over the said mobile phone to the 2^nd opposite party and the 2^nd opposite party issued receipt for acceptance on 25/5/2010. Thereafter the complainant approached the 2^nd opposite party several times and requested to replace the mobile phone. But the opposite parties did not turn up to replace the same or cure the defects. The mobile phone is still in the custody of the 2^nd opposite party. The complainant stated that he has faced so many difficulties in his business without the mobile phone. The complainant alleges that there is delay in service and unfair trade practice from the side of opposite parties and that cause mental agony and financial loss to the complainant. Hence he claimed compensation also from the opposite parties.

2. 1^st opposite party in this case is Orbit Mobile and 2^nd opposite party is Minnus Mobiles. Both the opposite parties accepted notice from this Forum. But they never turned up to contest the case. Hence the opposite parties remain ex-parte.

The complainant has filed proof affidavit and he has produced 2 documents.

The points that arise for consideration are:

1. Whether there is deficiency in service or unfair trade practice from the side of opposite parties?

2. Whether the complainant is entitled to get the reliefs and costs?

3. Points (i) & (ii) : The complainant’s case is that he has purchased a Karbon K-451 Mobile phone from the 1^st opposite party for an amount of Rs.3,100/- on 25/11/2009. He has also paid Rs.400/- for memory card. Copy of the purchase bill has been produced here and marked as Ext. P1. But within one month the phone became defective and as per the direction of the 1^st opposite party the complainant had handed over the mobile phone to the 2^nd opposite party for replacement. Ext. P2 is the copy of the receipt issued by the 2^nd opposite party to the complainant regarding the complaint of the Mobile phone and the terms and conditions of the 2^nd opposite party’s service. From this document we can understand that the Mobile phone is in the custody of the 2^nd opposite party. But till date the opposite parties have not returned the Mobile phone to the complainant or has replaced it. The complainant claims Rs.3,100/- the price of the Mobile phone and Rs.400/- the price of the memory card from the opposite parties. The opposite parties eventhough accepted the notice of this complaint never turned up to contest the case. We find that there is no need for expert opinion under Section 13(1)c of the Consumer Protection Act since the defective Mobile phone is within the custody of 2^nd opposite party. In this circumstance we find that the complainant is entitled to get the reliefs sought for and costs of the proceedings. Hence the complaint is allowed.

In the result, the opposite parties are jointly and severally liable to pay Rs.3,500/- to the complainant as the price of the Mobile phone and memory card. The opposite parties shall pay Rs.2,000/- as compensation and Rs. 1,500/- as costs of the proceedings to the complainant. Time for compliance one month from the date of receipt of this Order, or else 12% annual interest shall be paid to the entire amount till realisation.

A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties free of charge and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room.

Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the open Forum, this the 15^th day of September, 2010.

BEENA KUMARI.A

MEMBER.

G.SIVAPRASAD, PRESIDENT.

ad. S.K. SREELA,

MEMBER.

C.C.No.180/2010

APPENDIX

I. Complainant’s witness : NIL

II.Complainant’s documents:

P1 : Copy of Retail Invoice Cash/Credit dated 25/11/09.

P2 : Copy of the receipt issued by the 2^nd opposite party to the complainant.

III. Opposite parties’ witness : NIL

4. Opposite parties’ documents : NIL

PRESIDENT

ad.