Before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Rohtak.
Complaint No. : 06.
Instituted on : 02.01.2018.
Decided on : 03.06.2022.
Asha age 24 years, D/o Sh. Ramesh R/o H.No.333, Village Bohar Tehsil and District Rohtak.
……….………..Complainant.
Vs.
- S.G. Communication, Narayana Complex, Rohtak through its Proprietor.
- M/s Dhingra Services 1st floor besides Vijay Bank, Narayan Complex, Near Chhotu Ram Chowk, Rohtak(Haryana).
- Manufacturer Xiomi Technology India Pvt. Ltd. Rising Stars Mobile India Pvt. Ltd., 380 Belerica Road Sri City Siddam Agra, haram village Varadalahpalem Mandel Chitore District Andra Pradesh-517541.
..…….……….Opposite parties.
COMPLAINT U/S 12 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,1986.
BEFORE: SH.NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT.
DR. TRIPTI PANNU, MEMBER.
DR.SHYAM LAL, MEMBER.
Present: Sh.Rinku Jangra, Advocate for the complainant.
Opposite party No.1 & 2 exparte.
Sh.Kunal Juneja Advocate for opposite party No.3.
ORDER
NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN PRESIDENT:
1. Brief facts of the case are that the complainant purchased a mobile phone make M.I Dual Sim, vide bill no.10013 dated 04.01.2017 for Rs.9400/- and respondent no.1 assured the complainant that if the said mobile phone become defective within warranty/guarantee period, that it would be replaced with the new one of same make and model from the date of its purchase. The complainant faced a lot of problems in the above said mobile phone. The touch screen and display of the said mobile is not working properly and there are other problems like Mess fault, battery damage, speaker and hang problem, charging battery overheating problem and power does not switch on. The complainant approached the respondent no.1 and the respondent no.1 advised the complainant to contact respondent no.2 but the official of respondent no.2 after checking the phone provided him job sheet dated 27.03.2017. Again complainant approached the respondent no.2 on 04.10.2017 but the official of respondent no.2 after checking the phone and providing him job sheet dated 04.10.2017 and kept the phone with him and returned the said mobile phone without complete repair to the complainant. But after repairing of the said mobile phone, it did not work properly and the complainant had to visit the official of respondent no.2. They checked the phone and providing him job sheet no.WXIN17100205 but it again did not work and complainant contacted the respondent no.2 and requested to replace the mobile phone with new one but the respondent behaved in a rude manner and said that nothing can be done. Complainant also contacted respondent no.1 but in vain. Due to the act and conduct of the opposite parties, complainant suffered mental agony and harassment and there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties. Hence this complaint and it is prayed that opposite parties may kindly be directed to return back Rs.9400/- on account of price of mobile set alongwith interest, compensation and litigation expenses to the complainant as explained in relief clause.
2. After registration of complaint, notices were issued to the opposite parties. Opposite party No.2 did not appear despite service and was proceeded against exparte vide order dated 13.02.2018 of this Commission. Opposite party No.1 also did not appear and was proceeded against exparte vide order dated 25.09.2018 of this Commission. Opposite party No.3 in its reply has submitted that complainant had approached the authorized service centre of the respondent no.3 with issued related to the product. The complainant informed the technician of the service centre of respondent no.3 that the product was facing issue related to ‘speaker’. The service engineer duly recorded the issue in Job sheet and requested the complainant to wait until the examination/inspection is completed. After examining and reviewing the product the defects related to the product was duly repaired by the technician of the authorized service centre of the respondent no.3 by replacing the main Board & speaker of the product as per the standard applicable warranty conditions and the product was duly returned to the complainant in proper working condition as can be ascertained from service job sheet no.WXIN1703270001456. On October 04.2017 complainant again approached the authorized service centre of respondent no.3 with issues related to battery. The service engineer duly recorded the issue in service sheet and requested the complainant to wait until the examination/inspection is completed. After examining the product, it was ascertained that the warranty of the battery of the product has expired as there is a 6 months warranty period for all the accessories of the respondent No.3’s products. The technician of the authorized service centre informed the complainant to pay repair costs. The complainant duly paid the repair costs and the product was repaired and returned to the complainant in proper working condition. On October 10, 2017 complainant again approached the authorized service centre of the respondent no.3 with issues related to the ‘Touch Screen” in the product and after examining the product, it was ascertained that the product had suffered physical damage. The repair was not covered under warranty so the complainant duly paid the repair costs and the product was duly repaired. Again on 05.12.2017 complainant again approached the service centre with issues related to ‘touch screen”. The technician of authorized service centre of the respondent no.3 duly repaired the product by replacing the Main-Board of the product. On all the occasions the respondent no.3 had repaired all the defects in the product in a compete manner or replaced any defective part as per the standard warranty terms and conditions applicable to the product. Therefore there is no deficiency in service on the part of respondent no.3 or any of its agents and dismissal of the complaint has been sought.
3. Ld. counsel for the complainant in his evidence has tendered affidavit Ex.CW1/A, documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C8 and has closed his evidence on dated 23.10.2019. Ld. counsel for the opposite party No.3 has tendered affidavit Ex.RW1/A, documents Ex.R1 to Ex.R8 and has closed his evidence on dated 03.03.2021.
4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through material aspects of the case very carefully.
5. Both the parties have placed on record job sheets. As per the job sheet filed by the respondent No.3, first time mobile was brought before the service centre on 27.03.2017, thereafter on 04.10.2017, 10.01.2017 and 05.12.2017. In the job sheet dated 10.10.2017 the status of the mobile was found out of warranty due to touch screen crack and again on dated 05.12.2017, the status of mobile was found in warranty and the description of the fault from the consumer was “touch not working”. Meaning thereby on 10.10.2017 the mobile was repaired by the service centre and due to this fact the mobile was again considered under warranty on 05.12.2017. But perusal of job sheet itself shows that the mobile became defective 4 times in a year, which could not be repaired properly despite repeated repairs by the service centre of the company, which shows that there is some manufacturing defect in the mobile in question and opposite party No.3 being manufacturer is liable to refund the price of mobile set after deducting the 50% depreciation on it as the complainant has used the mobile set uninterruptedly upto 27.03.2017 and thereafter upto 04.10.2017 (for 10 months approximately) i.e. to pay Rs.9400/- less 50% = Rs.4700/-.
6. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, we hereby allow the complaint and direct the opposite party No.3 to refund the amount of Rs.4700/-(Rupees four thousand and seven hundred only) alongwith interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of filing the present complaint i.e. 02.01.2018 till its realization and shall also pay Rs.2000/-(Rupees two thousand only) as compensation on account of deficiency in service and Rs.3000/-(Rupees three thousand only) as litigation expenses to the complainant. Order shall be complied within one month from the date of decision. Complainant is directed to hand over the mobile set in question to the opposite party no.3 at the time of making payment by opposite party No.3.
7. Copy of this order be supplied to both the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.
Announced in open court:
03.06.2022.
................................................
Nagender Singh Kadian, President
..........................................
Tripti Pannu, Member.
…………………………..
Shyam Lal, Member
