BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

VAZHUTHACAUD : THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

PRESENT

SRI.  P.V. JAYARAJAN                                : PRESIDENT

SMT. PREETHA G. NAIR                           : MEMBER

SRI. VIJU  V.R.                                             : MEMBER

C.C.No. 260/2021  Filed on 15/09/2021

ORDER DATED: 10/12/2021

ORDER

SMT. PREETHA G. NAIR: MEMBER

                        Complainant had purchased POCO X 2 mobile phone on June 11^th 2020 from Flipkart for an amount of Rs.17,499/- and updated the software.  After the updation the camera was not opening up or working properly.  Subsequently the touch screen also became defective and was not responding.

                        The complainant was directed to the authorized service centre by the customer service and software was downloaded by the authorized service centre as a temporary solution for the problem.  But they informed the complainant that till date no solution is offered by opposite party despite alarming number of complaints raised by the customers on August 26.  The complainant raised a complaint to the official grievances redressal cell of the company, which till date is not redressed.  Hence the complaint.

            After accepting the notice the opposite party is not present and opposite party set ex parte.  Complainant filed proof affidavit and documents Ext.P1 to P3 marked from the side of complainant.   

                        Issues to be considered are:

1. Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of opposite party?
2. If so what is the relief and cost?

            Issue Nos. (i) & (ii) : We perused relevant documents on record.  Ext.P1 is the tax invoice for an amount of Rs.17,499/- for the cost of mobile handsets.  Ext.P2 is copy of the service order dated 26/08/2021 shows the fault description “Back camera not working, front camera not working”.  Ext.P3 is the copy of tax invoice dated 26/08/2021 shows the inspection charges was Rs.100/-.  Ext.P2 shows the defects of mobile phone.  Ext.P1 is the copy of tax invoice shows that warranty: Brand warranty one year available for mobile and 6 months for accessories.  The complainant had purchased the mobile phone on 11/06/2020 and the service order reported the defects of mobile phone on 26/08/2021.  It is revealed that the defect of the mobile phone was noted after the warranty period.  The complainant stated that after the updation the camera was not opening up or working properly.  No contra evidence produced by the opposite party.

In the result complaint is allowed.We direct the opposite party to pay Rs.17,499/- as the price of mobile phone (Rupees Seventeen Thousand Four Hundred and Ninety Nine only) and pay Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand Only) as compensation and Rs.2,500/- (Rupees Two Thousand Five Hundred Only) as cost of the proceedings, within one month from the date of receipt of this order.Failing which the amount except cost shall carry 9% interest from the date of order till the date of payment/realization.  Directed the complainant to hand over the mobile phone to the opposite party after complying the order. 

                        A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements is forwarded to the parties free of charge and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room.

Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Forum, this the 10^th day of December 2021.

C.C.No.260/2021

                                                                 APPENDIX

I           COMPLAINANT’S WITNESS:

               NIL

II          COMPLAINANT’S DOCUMENTS:

III         OPPOSITE PARTY’S WITNESS:

               NIL

IV        OPPOSITE PARTY’S DOCUMENTS:

              NIL

                                                                 Sd/-

PRESIDENT