Haryana

Panchkula

CC/40/2016

SHUBHAM JAIN - Complainant(s)

Versus

YU TELEVENTURES PVT.LTD. - Opp.Party(s)

COMPLAINANT IN PERSON.

12 May 2016

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,  PANCHKULA.                                                             

Consumer Complaint No	:	40 of 2016
Date of Institution	:	18.02.2016
Date of Decision	:	12.05.2016

                                                                                          

Sh.Shubham Jain s/o Sh.Pankaj Jain, R/o House No.664, Sector 12-A, Panchkula.

                                                                                       ….Complainant

Versus

 

1.       Yu Televentures Pvt. Ltd. through its Board of Directors.

2.       Sumeet Kumar, Director of Yu Televentures Pvt. Ltd.

3.       Rahul Sharma, Director of Yu Televentures Pvt. Ltd.

4.       Vikas Jain, Director of Yu Televentures Pvt. Ltd.

Having its Head Office at Block A, Plot No.21/14, Naraina, Industrial Area, Phase-II, Delhi-110028.

                                                                                        ….Opposite Parties

COMPLAINT UNDER SEC. 12 OF THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, 1986.

 

Before:                 Mr.Dharam Pal, President.

Mrs.Anita Kapoor, Member.

                             Mr.S.P.Attri, Member.

 

For the Parties:     Mr.Suman Jain, Adv., for the complainant. 

Ops already ex-parte.

ORDER

(Dharam Pal, President)

1. The present complaint has filed by the complainant against the Ops with the averments that he purchased a mobile phone from the Ops on 22.01.2015 for Rs.9,000/- online model Yu Yureka (Model AO5510 Moondust Grey Colour) through Ops’ exclusive e-commerce partner website “www.amazon.co.in’ vide invoice dated 22.01.2015 (Annexure C-1).After purchase of mobile phone, it started giving problem in excessive heating, battery draining. The complainant contacted the customer support of www.amazon.co.in and he was told to contact Yu Televentures at its online website TUPlaygod.com or its customer care No.1860-212-2122. Thereafter, the complainant lodged a complaint at customer care number and email as well. After few days, on 07.02.2015, the device of the mobile was replaced (Annexure C-2). In the month of June, 2015, the mobile started giving problem in data cable. The complainant registered a complaint at Ops’ toll-free number with complaint No.1016740/05.06.2015 and within a period of 20 days, the cable was replaced with new one. Thereafter, in the month of July, 2015, the mobile started giving problem in heating and battery drainage. The complainant made a complaint at customer care number and he was asked to “FLASH” his mobile and the instruction for the same was sent at complainant’s email ID. A reference No.1147110 was also given to the complainant. After doing the flash process, the problem of complainant was resolved but temporarily. In the month of October, 2015, the mobile again started problem in heating and battery drainage. The complainant registered a complaint at toll free number and through email. The complainant was advised to follow the hard resent process through email dated 10.120.2015 vide ticket id No.1458035. The complainant followed the process but the problem was not resolved. The complainant again registered a complaint vide ticket ID No.1472395 and he was asked to follow the flashing process. The complainant followed the process but to no avail. The complainant again registered a complaint vide ticket id No.1474717 and he was assured for replacement or he received a new device within the period of 15 working days and waybill No.343510933354 was generated on 18.10.2015. The complainant received the replaced device on 03.11.2015. After some days, the mobile started giving problem in heating & battery drainage and the complainant lodged a complaint on 02.12.2015 vide ticket ID No.1745403. The complainant was advised to follow the flash procedure and the complainant followed the same but to no avail. The complainant again made a complaint at customer care of Ops vide ticket id No.1753531 and he was asked to provide some information which was duly provided by him and another ticket id No.1773397 was generated. The complainant was again given a waybill No.343511240396 on 15.12.2015 and he was told to wait for 15 working days. The complainant was also assured that he would receive the replaced device again but he has not received any update. The complainant again contacted the customer care number and he was told that his request was under process & to wait for 15 days. The complainant kept on enquiring about the status of his complaint through emails and phone calls but to no avail. The complainant sent a legal notice dated 19.01.2016 but to no avail. This act of the opposite parties amounts to deficiency in service on their part. Hence, this complaint.
2. Notice was issued to the Ops through registered post. But none has appeared on behalf of the Ops. It is deemed to be served and the Ops were proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 28.03.2016.
3. The complainant has tendered the evidence by way of affidavit Annexure C-A alongwith documents Annexure C-1 to C-10 and closed the evidence.
4. We have heard learned counsel for the complainant and have also perused the record carefully and minutely.
5. It is evident from Annexure C-1 that the complainant purchased a mobile phone for an amount of Rs.9,000/- online model Yu Yureka (Model AO5510 Moondust Grey Colour) through Ops’ exclusive e-commerce partner website “www.amazon.co.in’ vide invoice dated 22.01.2015. After purchase of mobile phone, it started giving problem in heating and battery draining. The complainant contacted the customer support of www.amazon.co.in and he was advised to contact Yu Televentures at its online website TUPlaygod.com or its customer care No.1860-212-2122. Thereafter, the complainant lodged a complaint at customer care number and email as well. After few days, on 07.02.2015, the device of the mobile was replaced (Annexure C-2). In the month of June, 2015, the mobile started problem in data cable. The complainant registered a complaint vide complaint No.1016740/05.06.2015 and the cable was replaced with new one. Thereafter, in the month of July, 2015, the mobile started problem in heating and battery drainage. The complainant again lodged a complaint at customer care number and he was asked to “FLASH” his mobile (Annexure C-3). After doing the flash process, the problem of complainant was resolved but temporarily. In the month of October, 2015, the mobile again started problem in heating and battery drainage. The complainant registered a complaint at toll free number & through email and he was advised to follow the hard resent process through email dated 10.12.2015 (Annexure C-4) but in vain. The complainant again registered a complaint vide ticket id No.1474717 and he was assured for replacement or he received a new device within the period of 15 working days and waybill No.343510933354 was also generated on 18.10.2015 (Annexure C-6) and the device was replaced on 03.11.2015. After some days, the mobile again started giving problem in heating & battery drainage and the complainant lodged a complaint on 02.12.2015 vide ticket ID No.1745403 (Annexure C-8). The complainant was advised to follow the flash procedure but to no avail. The complainant again made a complaint at customer care of Ops vide ticket id No.1753531 and he was again given a waybill No.343511240396 on 15.12.2015 & he was told to wait for 15 working days. The complainant was also assured that he would receive the replaced device again but to no avail. The complainant again contacted the customer care number several times through emails and phone calls but to no avail. From the above, it is clear that after following the many procedures and replacements, the problem in mobile phone still remained. The complainant has also filed his duly sworn affidavit (Annexure C-A).
6. Moreover, the Ops did not appear to contest the claim of the complainant and preferred to be proceeded ex-parte, which draws an adverse inference against them. The non-appearance of the Ops shows that they have nothing to say in their defence or against the allegations made by the complainant. Therefore, the assertions made by the complainant go unrebutted and uncontroverted. As such, the same is accepted as correct and deficiency in service on the part of the Ops is proved.
7. In view of the above discussion, we are of the opinion that the present complaint deserves to be allowed and the same is accordingly allowed. The Ops are directed as under:-

(i)      To refund the price of the mobile i.e. Rs.9,000/-  alongwith 9% interest from the date of filing of complaint till its realization.

(ii)     To pay an amount of Rs.5,000/- as compensation for mental agony and harassment.

(iii)    To pay an amount of Rs.5,000/- as cost of litigation.

Let the order be complied with within the period of 30 days from the receipt of certified copy of this order.  A copy of this order be sent to the parties free of costs and file be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Announced

12.05.2016     S.P.ATTRI           ANITA KAPOOR         DHARAM PAL

                         MEMBER          MEMBER                      PRESIDENT

Note: Each and every page of this order has been duly signed by me.

                                          

                                                         DHARAM PAL

                                                          PRESIDENT