DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,

PATIALA.

                                      Consumer Complaint No. 289 of 26.7.2016

                                      Decided on:           13.12.2017

Lakhvir Singh Bisla aged about 40 years son of Sh.Narata Singh resident of village Assarpur, Tehsil Samana District Patiala.

                                                                   …………...Complainant

                                      Versus

1.       Unicorn Infosolutions Pvt. Ltd., First Floor, Mittal Building, Bhupindra Road, Near Columbia Asia Hospital, Patiala authorized APPLE I-Phone service centre, through its Manager/authorized  official.

2.       FIDES DISTRIBUTION PRIVATE LIMITED BANGA C/o Proconnect Supply Chain Solutions Ltd., SY No.102/1,Adakamarnhali village, Dasanapura Hobli  Makali Post City Banglore/State Karnataka.

                                                                   …………Opposite Parties

                                      Complaint under Section 12 of the

                                      Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

QUORUM

                                      Smt. Neena Sandhu, President

                                      Smt. Neelam Gupta, Member                                       

ARGUED BY:

                                      Sh.S.S.Sahni,Advocate,counsel for complainant.

                                      Opposite parties No.1&2 ex-parte.                              

 ORDER

                                    SMT.NEELAM  GUPTA,  MEMBER

1. The complainant purchased one Apple Mobile phone i.e. I-phone-6S(16GB) through on-line service for a sum of Rs.49,999/- vide invoice No.S068B7/15-16/48766 on 2.12.2015 bearing IMEI No.353317072188106 through OP no.2 and paid the cash amount on delivery. It is averred that after about three months of the said purchase, the mobile phone got switched off one day and thereafter it did not switch ON and the complainant approached OP no.1 i.e. the service centre on 11.3.2016 vide job No.PTA:25771 GSX, Repair reference No.G229173850 and after checking the mobile phone, OP no.1 replaced the mobile phone with a new one on 14.3.2016 vide No.i.e.KGB:DNPR4K9QGRY5. Thereafter the complainant had been using the said I-phone and on 2.5.2016, again the same problem cropped up in the mobile phone as the mobile phone again got switched off  of its own and the complainant again approached OP no.1on 3.5.2016 and handed over the mobile phone to OP no.1 vide job No.PTA:39030 and after checking the same, the officials of OP no.1 found the problem to be the same and told that due to manufacturing defect of the company the mobile phone got switched off of its own and it retained the I-phone and assured the complainant that they would replace the handset within 2-3 days. Thereafter, the complainant visited the service centre time and again but the OP failed to replace the mobile phone with a new one which amounted to deficiency in service on its part. On 1.6.2016, the complainant got served a regd. legal notice to the OPs but to no use. Ultimately he approached this Forum under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act(for short the Act),1986.
2. On notice, OP no.1 failed to appear despite service whereas OP No.2 refused to receive the notice. As such both the OPs were proceeded against ex-parte.
3. In support of the complaint, the ld.counsel for the complainant has tendered in evidence Ex.CA affidavit of the complainant alongwith documents Exs.C1 to C6 and closed the evidence of the complainant.
4. We have heard the ld.counsel for the complainant and have also gone through the record of the case, carefully.
5. Ex.C1 is the copy of the invoice, whereby the  complainant purchased one Apple I-phone-6S(16GB) for a sum of Rs.49,999/-.Ex.C3 is the job sheet dated 11.3.2016, whereby the OP no.1 replaced the mobile phone of the complainant with a new one. After using the replaced mobile phone for some time again the same problem cropped up in the replaced mobile phone and the complainant deposited the mobile phone with Op no.1. On 3.5.2016, vide job sheet i.e.Ex.C2.Since 3.5.2016, the mobile phone in question has been lying with OP no.1 who has neither replaced nor returned the mobile phone to the complainant which amounted to deficiency in service on its part. After spending a huge amount of Rs.49,999/-the mobile phone did not function properly. Since last 19 months it is lying with OP no.1.
6. As an upshot of aforesaid discussion, we accept the complaint of the complainant with a direction to the OPs to refund the amount of Rs.49,999/- to the complainant. OPs are further directed to pay a sum of Rs.5000/- as compensation for the harassment undergone by the complainant alongwith a sum of Rs.4000/-as litigation expenses. Order be complied by the OPs within a period of 30 days from the date of the receipt of the certified copies of this order. Copies of this order be sent to the parties free of cost under the Rules.Thereafter, file be indexed and consigned to the Record Room.

ANNOUNCED

DATED:13.12.2017              

                                                                   NEENA SANDHU

                                                                       PRESIDENT

                                                                   NEELAM GUPTA

                                                                         MEMBER