SRI. JIMMY KORAH (RESIDENT) Filed on 31/10/2009 Complainant’s case is as follows:- Complainant is an employ in 'Legal Metrology Department'. He is working in Thiruvalla. He purchased a mobile phone handset, (Sony Ericsson) on13th November 2008 from the 1st opposite party. The cost of the said instrument was Rs.3990/-(Rupees three thousand nine hundred ninety only). Within a short time, the said mobile handset developed some sort of short comings and became defective. On 24th September 2009 the mobile set turned totally inoperative. Pursuant to thereof, the set was entrusted to the 2nd opposite party, the authorized service centre of the mobile set concerned. Two days thereafter, the 2nd opposite party handed over the mobile set to the complainant. The complainant was assured that the defect was cured. But contrary to the assurance, the set again failed to function properly. 2. The complainant again approach the 2nd opposite party on 1st October 2009. The 2nd opposite party impressed upon the complainant that its flaw could be rectified only in Chennai and it would take ten days time to get the set revamped. On expiry of ten days, the complainant again contacted on the 2nd opposite party to receive the same on 20th October 2009. This time, the complainant was apprised of that the PCB, the pivotal part of the set which was malfunctioning was replaced. The set soon fell out of order and the same was yet again handed over to the 2nd opposite party for further rectification. The complainant contacted the 2nd opposite party on 26.10.2009 and learnt that the impairment of the set could be resolved forever only on sending the same again to Chennai. By the said time, the warranty of the set was on the verge of expiry, and still the set, on several rounds of repair and mending was unusable. For all the same reasons, the complainant was absolutely averse to test his fortune further. As such, the complainant required the opposite party to hand back him the cost of the mobile set. The response was not only discouraging but also defiant. The complainant incurred considerable pecuniary loss. He had to go on leave from his work for many days. That apart the complainant sustained both physical and mental hardship. Got aggrieved by this, the said complaint has been filed before this Forum. 3. Sent notice to the opposite parties. They didn't turn up. So they were set Exparte. 4. The complainant filed proof affidavit and the documents Exts.Al to A5 were marked. Ext. Al is the bill of the mobile set, A2, A3 and A5 are the receipt given to the complainant pertaining to its repair. A4 is the warranty card. 5. Taking into account the contentions of the complainant the Forum raised the following issues:- (a) Is the complainant entitled to the relief as sought for in the complaint? 6. The complainant purchased a mobile phone handset from the 1st opposite party and it became defective at the beginning. Notwithstanding the repeated repair by the 2nd opposite party, the impairment of the set remained unresolved. The complainant was made to walk again and again in the name of repairing the same. We perused the materials, the complainant produced before us. The records bear out what were averred in the complaint. The complainant is a venerable functionary of the 'Legal Metrology Department'. He sustained financial loss as well as mental agony. We are not hesitant to hold that the complainant has been aggrieved. Also as already noted, all these aspects remain unassailed. In this back drop, the opposite parties are directed to pay the purchase amount of the mobile set viz.Rs. 3990/-(Rupees three thousand nine hundred and ninety only) to the complainant. They are also directed to pay a compensation of Rs.3000/- (Rupees three thousand only) to the complainant for his mental agony, pain and inconvenience. The complainant is also entitled to a cost of Rs.1000/- (Rupees one thousand only) for this proceedings. The complaint is allowed accordingly. Pronounced in open Forum on this the 31st day of December, 2009. Sd/- Sri. Jimmy Korah: Sd/- Sri. K. Anirudhan: Sd/- Smt.N.Shajitha Beevi: Appendix:- Evidence of the complainant:- Ext.A1 - Bill of the mobile set Ext.A2, A3 & A5 - Receipts Ext.A4 - Warranty card Evidence of the opposite parties:- Nil // True Copy // By Order Senior Superintendent To Complainant/Opposite party/S.F. Typed by:-pr/- Compared by:- | 
