OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KAMRUP,GUWAHATI-03
C.C.87/2016
Present:-
1) Md.Sahadat Hussain, A.J.S. - President
2) Smti ArchanaDekaLahkar - Member
3) Md Jamatul Islam - Member
Shri Niraj Gupta - Complainant
S/O- Bhagwan Gupta,
R/O-H.No-12,ABC,6th Bye lane,Tarun Nagar,
G.S.Road,Guwahati,Dist-Kamrup(M),Assam
-VS-
1. Xiaomi Technology India Pvt.Ltd. - Opp.party
5th floor,Tower-1,
Umiya Business Bay Marathahalli,
Sarjapur,Outer Ring Road,Bengalaru,Karnataka-560103
2. Mr Manu Jain
General Manager/ Managing Diretor,
Xiaomi Technology Pvt.Ltd.
5th floor,Delta Blk,
Embassy Tech ,Sq, Marathahalli,
Sarjapur,Outer Ring Road,Bengalaru,Karnataka-560103
3. Mobile Store Ltd.
Essar House,11 K.K.Marg,Mahalaxmi,Mumbai-400034,
4. The Managing Director ,
Mobile Store Ltd., Shop Astor Place,Opp.PF Office,
Kandivali West ,Mumbai,Maharashtra-400067
5. Proprietor/Partners
The Mobile Store Ltd.
GNB Road,MRD Road,Below SBI,
Near Assam Engineering Institute,Chandmari,
Guwahati-781003,Dist-Kamrup(M),Assam
6. Proprietor/Partners
M/S Netsol Associates,
Opp. Nemcare Hospital,Guwahati,
Dist-Kamrup,Assam,Pin-781006
Appearance:
Ld advocate Ms Sangita Deka for the complainant .
Date of argument - 25/09/2018
Date of judgment – 25/09/2018
EXPARTE JUDGMENT
This is a proceeding U/S- 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986
1. The complaint filed by Shri Niraj Gupta against Xiaomi Technology India Pvt.Ltd. and five others was admitted on 20/09/2016 and notices were served upon them , but none of them appeared in this proceeding and accordingly the case against opp. parties is proceeding on exparte vide our orde dtd. 21/07/2017 and 04/06/2018. Opp.Party No-1 and 2 filed joint written statement on 02/02/2017 before passing the order of exparte hearing against them . We have perused the exparte evidence and argument of complainant side which is forwarded by ld advocate Ms Sangita Deka and pass the judgment today, which is as below-
2. The case of the complainant is that the handset, of Mi 4i (Grey) bearing IMEI No-867634025058783 867634025058791 manufactured by Opp.Party No-1 and 2 and which he purchased from Opp.Party No-5 , who is the authorised retailer of Opp.Party No-3 , suddenly showed malfunctioning and he deposited the same to Opp.Party No-5 on 21/06/2016 to get it repaired through their service centre , which is Opp.Party No-6 . He visited Opp.Party No-5 to enquire about the repairing of his mobile on 02/07/2016 and he was informed that the handset was not sent to the head office for repairing . The handset was not returned back to him and he sent a legal notice to the opp. parties but they did not reply to the said legal notice, nor returned his mobile after rep[airing it although it is within warranty period and thereby they committed deficiency of service towards him.
3. After perusing the evidence of the complainant , it is found that the complainant had purchased a handset vide Model-Mi 4i (Grey), from Opp.Party No-5 who is the authorised retailer of Opp.Party No-3 on 05/09/2015 at a price of Rs. 15,497/- and the said handset was manufactured by Xiaomi Technology India Pvt.Ltd. (Opp.Party No-1 ) . It is also found that the warranty period is 1(one) year . The complainant said that his handset showed malfunctioning on 21/06/2016 i.e . within warranty period and he deposited the handset to Opp.Party No-5 for repairing but Opp. Party No-5 neither repaired the handset nor returned the handset to him. After perusing Ext-2 , the service job sheet issued by Opp.Party No-5, it is found that the complainant deposited the said handset to Opp.Party No-5 on 21/06/2016 for repairing and this document substantiate the version of the complainant that the said handset suddenly started malfunctioning and he deposited the handset to Opp.Party No-5 for repairing but Opp. Party No-5 neither repaired it nor returned it to the complainant till now . So, this act on the Opp. Party No-5 is an act of deficiency of service towards the complainant .
It is already found that the said mobile handset showed malfunctioning within the period of warranty . Hence , as per warranty the manufacturer of it is liable to get it repaired free of cost through their dealers and service centres . Here in this case opp.Party No-1 and 2 who are manufacturer of the said handset and Opp.Party No-3 , 4 and 5 are the dealers of the product of Opp.Party No-1 and 2 and Opp.Party No-6 is the service centre of Opp.Party No-1 to 5 are liable to repair the said handset . In this case, it is established that the mobile handset was received by Opp.Party No-5 who is the local branch of Opp.Party No-3 for repairing. Hence, for not repairing and not returing the said handset by Opp.Party No-5 to the complainant Opp.Party No-1 , 2 , 3 and 4 are vicariously responsible . Hence , Opp.Party No- 1,2,3,4 and 5 are all equally responsible for getting the mobile handset repaired free of cost , but as none of them had taken any step for repairing the said handset , all of them must be said to have committed deficiency of service towards the complainant .
4. As the mobile handset was not at all returned to the complainant by Opp.Party No-5, Opp.Party No-1 to 5 are jointly and severally liable to pay the price of the said mobile handset to the complainant which is Rs. 15,497/- along with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of filing of the complaint. As the Opp.Party No-1 to 5, by not repairing the handset of the complainant and returning the said handset to the complainant, also caused professional loss to the complainant as well as harassment to him , hence they are liable to pay him atleast Rs.5,000/- as compensation for causing such harassment and professional loss . They are also liable to pay Rs. 5,000/- to the complainant as cost of the proceeding .
5. Summing up our discussion as above, we hold that the complainant has a prima facie case against Opp.Party No-1 to 5 which he has succeeded to prove . Accordingly , the complaint against Opp.Party No-1 to 5 is allowed on exparte and Opp.Party No-1 to 5 are directed to pay the price of the handset, Rs.15,497/- along with interest @12% per annum from 09/10/2016 and also to pay him Rs.5,000/- as compensation and Rs.5,000/- as cost of the proceeding , to which, they are jointly and severally liable .They are directed to pay the awarded amount within 45 days , in default, other amounts shall also carry interest at the same rate.
Given under our hands and seals today on this 25th September ,2018.
(Smt Archana Deka Lahkar) (Md.Jamatul Islam) (Md.Sahadat Hussain) Member Member President
