Delhi

North East

CC/139/2018

Ms. Sanu - Complainant(s)

Versus

Vijay Sales - Opp.Party(s)

18 Oct 2019

ORDER

 DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM: NORTH-EAST

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

D.C. OFFICE COMPLEX, BUNKAR VIHAR, NAND NAGRI, DELHI-93

 

Complaint Case No. 139/18

 

In the matter of:

	Ms Sanu D/o Shri Mohd. Naushad, R/o T-Huts No. 86, G.T. Road Sonia Camp, Jhilmil Industrial Area Shahadara, East Delhi Delhi-110095	Complainant
	Versus
1         2	Vijay Sales Plot no. 485-A-1/2, Opp. Dilshad Garden Metro Station Shahdara, Delhi-110095   MI Service Centre Office No. 6, 1st floor, DDA Market Pocket-I, Dilshad Garden Near Gauri Shankar Mandir Delhi-110094	Opposite Parties

 

DATE OF INSTITUTION:    JUDGMENT RESERVED ON:               DATE OF DECISION   :

16.07.2018 18.10.2019 18.10.2019

 

N.K. Sharma, President

Ms. Sonica Mehrotra, Member

 

Order passed by Ms. Sonica Mehrotra, Member

 

ORDER

1. Facts of the present complaint shorn of unnecessary details as narrated by the complainant are that on 21.06.2018 the complainant had purchased Redme Note5 Pro 4GB color Black handset from OP1 for a sum of Rs. 15,499/- vide invoice no. 314-R-SI 2528 with one year warranty. However, the said handset started giving problems of auto disconnect and switch off, hanging and heating issues from the very beginning of its usage for which the complainant visited OP2, service centre on 28.06.2018 apprising them of the problems in the handset but was told that the repairs would be chargeable because they are not physical damage problems but internal issues with the handset. The complainant on the same date went to OP1 retailer and informed him about the defects in the said handset and was advised to get Dead on Arrival (DOA) letter from OP2 so that OP1 can replace the subject handset. However when complainant approached OP2 on 30.06.2018 asking OP2 to give her the DOA letter, vide application, OP2 flatly refused to give the DOA letter to the complainant and took no action in this regard. Even OP1 was non responsive to the complaint of the complainant. The complainant sought police intervention vide written complaint dated 30.06.2018 vide DD No. 63B with PS Seemapuri, Delhi but the police officials also advised her to take legal recourse by way of a consumer case. The complainant wrote e-mail dated 03.07.2018 to customer care of OP2 about the grievance after which vide reply e-mail dated 04.07.2018, OP2 asked the complainant to furnish details pertaining to the service centre and response giving by it and the details of the handset. Thereafter the complainant visited the service centre of OP2 on 05.07.2018 and got the subject handset inspected on the said date and vide Inspection Sheet created by the said service centre, the said handset was shown as ‘Out of Warranty’. OP2 vide e-mail dated 09.07.2018 acknowledged the e-mail of the complainant regarding problem of heating in the handset and unresolved issues by the service centre but declined to assist any further in view of the report receipt from the service centre that the device has been bent and therefore warranty rendered void. Lastly, complainant sent a legal notice dated 09.07.2018 through counsel to the OPs demanding replacement of the refund of the handset alongwith damages but went unheeded by the OPs. Therefore alleging deficiency of service and finding no alternative, complainant was compelled to initiate legal proceedings against the OPs by way of present complaint praying for issuance of directions to either replace the handset or refund its price alongwith compensation of Rs. 30,000/- towards mental harassment, Rs. 10,000/- for loss of job and Rs. 8,000/- towards litigation charges.

Complainant has attached copy of purchase invoice dated 21.06.2018, copy of application dated 30.06.2018 by complainant to OP2 asking for DOA report as asked for by OP1 for replacing the handset, copy of police complaint dated 30.06.2018 by complainant with PS Seemapuri, Delhi, copy of e-mails dated 03.07.2018, 04.07.2018 and 09.07.2018 exchanged between complainant and customer care of OP2 alongwith certificate under Section 65B of Indian Evidence Act, copy of inspection sheet dated 05.07.2018 issued by service centre of MI and copy of legal notice dated 09.07.2018 by the complainant counsel alongwith postal receipts.

2. Notice was issued to the OPs on 20.07.2018. However none appeared on their behalf despite service effected on 07.08.2019 and was therefore proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 16.11.2018.
3. Complainant filed ex-parte evidence by way of affidavit and written arguments in reiteration / reassertion of his grievance against the OPs and exhibited the documents relied upon as Exhibit CW1/A to CW1/J.
4. We have heard the arguments addressed by the counsel of the complainant and have perused the documentary evidence placed on record. During the course of oral arguments, the complainant produced the handset in the original box before this Forum and the same did not appear ‘bent’ when put on flat surface. The OPs failed to appear or rebut the allegations leveled by the complainant of having sold a defective handset and refusal to give DOA report which could have facilitated at least its replacement if not refund as per assurance given by OP1. As per records, the handset purchased on 21.06.2018 was rendered out of warranty by the OP2 on 05.07.2018 i.e. barely within 15 days of its purchase which is difficult to fathom. We therefore are of the belief that the subject handset suffered from inherent defect for which reason it did not even function for a month what to talk of the warranty period.
5. We therefore allow the present complaint and direct the OPs jointly and severally to refund the cost the handset i.e. Rs. 15,499/-to the complainant. We further direct both OPs jointly and severally to pay compensation of Rs. 5,000/- towards mental harassment inclusive of litigation charges. Let the order be complied with by OPs within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.          
6.  Let a copy of this order be sent to each party free of cost as per regulation 21 of the Consumer Protection Regulations, 2005.
7.   File be consigned to record room.
8.   Announced on  18.10.2019

 

(N.K. Sharma)     President

(Sonica Mehrotra)  Member