Haryana

Ambala

CC/94/2015

Dinesh Kumar - Complainant(s)

Versus

Vinayak Enterprises - Opp.Party(s)

U.S.Mahi

16 Jun 2015

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, AMBALA.

Complaint Case No.    : 94 of 2015

Date of Institution       : 07.04.2015

Date of Decision         :16.06.2015

Dinesh Kumar son of Shri Jeevan Dass Gambhir resident of House No.235, Vivek Vihar, Ambala City.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     ……Complainant.

Versus

1.         M/s Hello World Communication, Shop No.264/2932, Old Civil Hospital Chowk, Jagadhir Gate, Ambala City.

2.         Karbonn Care Center 27^th, First Floor, M.C. Market, Behind Nigar Cinema, Ambala Cantt.

3.         Managing Director Karbonn Mobile Limited, H.O. D-170, Near D.D. Motors, Okhla, Industrial Area, Phase-I, Delhi-110020.                                                           

……Opposite Parties.

Complaint Under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.

CORAM:        SH. A.K. SARDANA, PRESIDENT.

                        SH. ANIL SHARMA, MEMBER.                                               

Present:          Complainant in person with Sh. Umaro Singh Mahi, Adv.

OPs No.1 & 2 exparte.

Sh. Sandeep Kashyap, Adv. for OP No.3.

ORDER.

1.                     Brief facts of the present complaint are that complainant purchased a mobile phone of Karbonn Company as per  invoice No.1550 dated 09.04.2014 for a sum of Rs.3600/- from OP No.1. The mobile set developed problem of hanging  etc.  As per job sheet No.7206903999 dated 09.01.2015, the defects were reported to the OP No.2-Service Centre but of no avail.  As such, a legal notice dated 17.03.2015 got served upon the Ops which was not responded by the Ops. Hence, having no alternative, the complainant preferred the present complaint seeking relief as mentioned in prayer clause of complaint.

2.                     Upon notice, Ops No.1 & 2 did not bother to appear and as such, they were proceeded against exparte whereas Op No.3 appeared and in-spite of filing of written statement, authorized representative of OP company Sh. Gajender Chandel, Area Service Manager tendered a statement that they are ready to replace the mobile set in question  bearing Model No. A-51 & IMEI No.911342154315844 with new one subject to deposition of old mobile set alongwith its accessories by complainant but complainant did not agree with the same rather tendered a statement that he does not want to take replaced mobile set of Karbonn company and requested for refund of the invoice value and further prayed that the case may be decided on merits.  

3.                     After hearing both the parties and going through the record as well as statements tendered by the parties, it is admitted  fact on record  that the mobile in dispute was purchased by the complainant from Op No.1 on 09.04.2014 in a sum of Rs.3600/- which  was having warranty of one year but the same became defective within warranty period.  Complainant approached many a times to the service centre of Op company but no any solution was made by Ops.  Further the version of complainant is also fortified from the job sheet vide which the complainant reported the defects of the mobile set to the service centre of the OP company which were not rectified by the OP No.2  and thus it is admittedly a deficiency in service on the part of Ops. Now-a-days mobile set is a basic necessity of lifestyle and no one can remain even a day without mobile set and complainant might have purchased a new mobile set and that is why, he has requested for return of price of mobile set in question instead of getting the replaced mobile set. Therefore, we  allow the present complaint and directs the Op No. 3 to comply with the following directions within thirty days from the communication of this order:-

1. To return the complainant, price of the mobile set to the tune of Rs.3600/- alongwith simple interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of complaint till its realization.
2. To pay a sum of Rs.1100/- as compensation on account of mental agony and harassment.
3. Also to pay Rs.1100/- as litigation costs.

                        Further the award in question/directions issued above must be complied with by the OP No.3 within the stipulated period failing which all the awarded amounts  shall further attract simple interest @ 12% per annum for the period of default.  Copies of this order be sent to the parties concerned, free of costs.  File be consigned to the record room after due compliance. 

 

Announced:16/06/2015                               Sd/-           

                                                              (A.K. SARDANA)

                                                               PRESIDENT

                                                                             Sd/-

                                                                 (ANIL SHARMA)                                                                                                                                                                                                       MEMBER