Delhi

East Delhi

CC/502/2014

BHARAT BHUSHAN - Complainant(s)

Versus

V4U SHOPPING - Opp.Party(s)

31 Jul 2015

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM (EAST)

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

CONVENIENT SHOPPING CENTRE, SAINI ENCLAVE, DELHI-92

[

CC No.502/2014

In the matter of:

Sh. Bharat BhushanVerma

R/o. 52 A,Gyan Park,

Gali No. 6,Chander Nagar,

Delhi – 110 051        

         Complainant

Vs

V4U Shopping Pvt. Ltd.

480,AggrawalMillenium Tower – 2,

NetajiSubhash Place,Pitampura,

New Delhi – 110 034

                                                                                                          Opposite Party

 

                                                   Date of Admission-17/07/2014

                                                    Date of Order        -11/01/2016

ORDER

Poonam Malhotra (Member):

The brief facts of the present complaint are that on 06/04/2014, the complainant booked through telephone a mobile phone with the respondent and it was delivered to him on 08/04/2014 against the payment of Rs. 2,200/- in all out of which Rs.2,000/- is the cost of the handset and Rs.200/- are the courier charges. On 09/04/2014 the complainant contacted the Customer Care Centre of the respondent on phone as the phone was not charging and its touch was not working properly.  The respondent alleges to have demanded Rs.200/- for repairing it.  The complainant alleges to have visited the Service Centre of the respondent and paid Rs.200/- for the job but was shocked when it again gave the same problem.  The complainant again alleges to have contacted the respondent on phone but in vain.  It is alleged that the respondent is deficient in providing services to the complainant.   He has prayed for refund of the cost of the handset together with Rs.25,000/- as compensation for harassment, mental pain and agony.

            Notices were issued to the respondent but no one put appearance on his behalf case proceeded ex-parte against the respondent.

Evidence by way of Affidavit filed by the complainant in support of the allegations made by him in his complaint.

Heard & perused the record.

The fact of purchase of the MCENT 3.2 Inch handset vide Order Form cum Retail Invoice dated 07/04/2014 for Rs.2,199/- (i.e., Rs.1,999/- cost of the handset + Rs.200/- Courier Charges) in all from the respondent is not in dispute.  It is a settled principle of law that one who raises an allegation has to prove it beyond doubt. Not an iota of evidence has been filed on record by the complainant to substantiate his allegations that the handset in question was suffering from defects alleged in the complaint and despite having approached the respondent for the rectification of the alleged defects in the said handset neither it has rectified the alleged defects nor refunded the cost of the handset to the complainant.  Further, he has also not filed on record the proof of payment of Rs.200/- alleged to have been paid by him to the respondent for the repairs of the handset in question.  In the absence of any credible documentary evidence in support of the allegations made in the complaint it is hard to believe the allegations made in the complaint and the same are, thus not acceptable to us. 

Taking the above facts and circumstances into consideration, the complainant has failed to make out a case against the respondent under the The Consumer Protection Act, 1986.  The present complaint deserves to be dismissed and it is accordingly dismissed.

Copy of this order be provided to both the parties.

 

(Dr.P.N.Tiwari)                                  (Poonam Malhotra)                                   (N.A.Zaidi)

      Member                                                   Member                                              President