By. Sri. P. Raveendran, Member:-

Brief of the complaint: On 23.11.2010 the complainant purchased one Samsung GT-C6112(Dual sim) mobile phone from 1^st opposite party and he was using the same. While so during the 1^st week of September 2011 the mobile phone power off automatically, so he approached the 1^st opposite party and as per the advice of the 1^st opposite party he approached the 2^nd opposite party on 06.09.2011 for repairing the mobile set and entrusted mobile set with opposite party No.2. At the time of entrusting mobile phone the opposite party No.2 informed that it would be repaired and given back within 2 weeks. But the opposite party No.2 not given mobile set after repair. After 2 months the opposite party told the complainant it is power off due to fungus and the complainant has to pay Rs.2,500/- for the repair of the same. So the complainant taken back the mobile set, the opposite party has to repair the mobile set within 2 weeks, not repairing the mobile set is deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties. Hence it is prayed that to give direction to opposite parties to repair the mobile set in free of cost. If the opposite parties fail to repair the mobile phone the cost of the mobile set ie Rs.6,500/- return to the complainant by opposite parties and allow Rs.10,000/- as cost and compensation.

2. Notices were served on the opposite parties. They appeared and filed their version. In the version they admitted that on 23.11.2010 the complainant purchased GT-C6112 (Dual sim) mobile set from opposite party. He denied other contentions in the complaint. They also contended that the Samsung company who manufactured the mobile set is to be a necessary party in this case. The 1^st opposite party is the seller and 2^nd opposite party is the service center of the Samsung phones. Opposite party No.2 admitted that the customers who are having Samsung phones, with warranty condition the opposite party has been repairing the same with free of cost. On 06.09.2011 the complainant came to the institution of the 2^nd opposite party and told that the mobile set wet with rain and the same power off and requested to examine the phone to ascertain what is the actual complaint. At that time the opposite party told the complainant that it will not come under the warranty. Anyhow it will be examined and entered same in service request form and obtained signature of the complainant. Mobile set wet with rain hence company and service center is not liable for repair. It is happened due to the careless of the complainant. After thorough verification it is known that due to wet the electric circuit and IC of this set is defect that fact informed to the complainant and told him the repairing charge of the same is to be carried out by the complainant. At that time the complainant obtained the mobile set without any dispute. He purposefully filed complaint against the opposite parties. Hence it is prayed to dismiss the complaint with the cost of the opposite parties.

3. On perusing the complaint and version following points are to be considered:-

1. Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties?

2. Relief and Cost.

4. Point No.1 :- To prove the complainant's case he filed his proof affidavit and Ext.A1 to A3 documents are also marked. To prove opposite parties case opposite party No.2 is examined as OPW1 and Ext.B1 marked. In the proof affidavit of the complainant he stated as stated in the complaint. Ext.A1 is the invoice issued to the complainant by opposite party No.1 on 23.11.2010. Ext.A2 is the service request form issued by opposite party No.2 to the complainant. Ext.B3 is the warranty card issued on 23.11.2010 by opposite party No.1. There is no dispute regarding the purchase of the mobile set. It is admitted that the mobile set purchased on 23.11.2010. On perusing Ext.A3, warranty card the mobile set is having one year warranty. The mobile set is purchased on 23.11.2010 and the mobile set entrusted with opposite party No.2 on 06.09.2011 that is within the warranty period. According to opposite parties the defects due to wet with rain. According to the complainant the opposite party told that it is due to fungus. Ext.A2 is the service request issued by the opposite party No.2 to the complainant. In the Ext.A2 the defects description is noted as no power on, it is not mentioned in the service request the defects is wet due to rain. Ext.B1 is the service request produced by opposite parties claiming that the above service request is issued at the time of delivering the mobile set. In the Ext.B1 also the defect description is noted as no power on. There is dispute regarding the return of the mobile set. According to the complainant it is after two months, but according to opposite parties it is after two days. In Ext.B1 we could not see the date of return. Even though the complainant and opposite party signed in the Ext.B1 they have not noted the date in Ext.B1. Even though the opposite parties have taken a contention of non jointer of necessary party in their version. They have not furnished correct address of the manufacturer that is the Samsung who is to be impleaded as supplementary opposite party. According to the opposite parties the defect is due to wet with rain. But it is not proved before the Forum. Hence we come to the conclusion that the defect is within warranty period, non repairing of the mobile set within the warranty period is deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties. Point No.1 is decided accordingly.

5. Point No.2 : The mobile set is in dispute is defect within warranty period. Hence opposite parties are to repair the mobile set in free of cost. If the opposite parties are failed to rectify the defects the complainant is entitled to get the cost of the mobile phone that is Rs.6,500/- from the opposite parties. The complainant is entitled to get Rs.1,000/- as cost and compensation from the opposite parties. Point No.2 is decided accordingly.

In the result the complaint is partly allowed and the opposite parties are directed to repair the mobile set of the complainant in free of cost. If the opposite parties are failed to do so they are directed to pay the cost of the mobile set that is Rs.6,500/- ( Rupees Six Thousand and Five Hundred Only) to the complainant. The opposite parties are also directed to pay an amount of Rs.1,000/- ( Rupees One Thousand Only) to the complainant as cost and compensation. This Order is to be complied within 30 days from the date of receipt of this.

Pronounced in Open Forum on this the day of 9^th March 2012.

Date of Filing:26.11.2011.