Delhi

East Delhi

CC/780/2015

SHIV NATH - Complainant(s)

Versus

YU TELEVENTURES - Opp.Party(s)

22 May 2017

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM (EAST)

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

CONVENIENT SHOPPING CENTRE, FIRST FLOOR,

SAINI ENCLAVE, DELHI – 110 092

 

C.C. NO. 780/15

 

Shri Shiv Nath Yadav

R/o R-205A, Ramesh Park

Gali No. 10, Laxmi Nagar

Delhi – 110 092                                                                ….Complainant

 

Vs.

 

1. Cloudtail India Pvt. Ltd.

Unit No. 1, Khewat/Khata No. 373/400

Mustatil No. 31, Vill. Taoru, Teshil Taoru

District Mewat on Bilaspur-Tarous Raod

Mewat – 122 105, Haryana

 

2. YU Televentures Pvt. Ltd.

Plot No. 21/24, Block-A

Naraina Industrail Area, Phase – 2

New Delhi – 110 028                                                         ….Opponents

 

Date of Institution: 18.11.2015

Judgment Reserved on: 22.05.2017

Judgment Passed on: 29.05.2017

CORUM:

Sh. Sukhdev Singh (President)

Dr. P.N. Tiwari  (Member)

Ms. Harpreet Kaur Charya (Member)

 

Order By : Ms. Harpreet Kaur Charya (Member)

 

 

JUDGEMENT

 

The present complaint has been filed by Shri Shiv Nath Yadav, the complainant against Cloudtail India Pvt. Ltd. (OP-1) and YU Televentures Pvt. Ltd. (OP-2) under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986.

2.       Facts in brief are that the complainant purchased mobile handset on 12.03.2015 for a sum of Rs. 8,999/- vide invoice no. HR-DEL2-144105041-1138503 and IMEI no. 911401503021121.  It is stated that from the very first day, there was some problem with the handset for which he made complaint at the customer care, but did not receive any satisfactory reply.  Various emails were written to OP, but the complainant’s grievance was not addressed.  The complainant contacted on the customer care number, where he was assured that the handset would be repaired, but till date his issues were not resolved.  Hence, the present complaint seeking directions to OP to refund the cost of the mobile and cover;   Rs. 50,000/- as compensation for mental agony and harassment and Rs. 15,000/- as cost of litigation.

          The complainant has annexed the invoice dated 12.03.2015, emails exchanged with OP and photocopy of the box of the mobile with the complaint. 

 

3.       Notice of the present complaint was served on OPs.  Thereafter, the reply was filed by OP-2 where it was stated that after sale service was never denied and OP was ready to provide the same as per terms and conditions of the warranty.  It was further stated that the OP was ready and willing to redress the grievance of the complaint.  The rest of the contents of the complaint were denied seeking dismissal of the complaint. 

 

4.       Rejoinder to the WS filed by OP-2, was filed where the contents of the complaint were reiterated and that of the WS was denied.

 

5.       Evidence by way of affidavit was filed on behalf of the complainant where he examined himself and narrated the facts of the complaint on oath.

          No evidence was filed by OP despite opportunity and as they had stopped appearing, they were proceeded ex-parte on 28.09.2016.

 

6.       We have heard the arguments on behalf of the complainant and Ld. Counsel for OP-2 and have perused the material placed on record.  Email dated 04.05.2015 annexed with the complaint shows that the complainant was facing problems with Battery, heating, hanging of the handset and automatic shutdown.  The issue of battery was resolved explaining the technical details to the complainant.  Further, email dated 23.08.2015 for which ticket no. 1254906 was issued and replacement/change of the charger was requested by the complainant in email dated 25.08.2015. 

          As the complainant had problem with the charger, which was under warranty for 6 months from the date of purchase as per terms and conditions, the said charger was out of warranty.  Further, the complainant has not placed on record any job sheet to prove that the handset had inherent defects as alleged by him.  Hence, the present complaint is dismissed being devoid of merits without order to cost. 

 

          Copy of the order be supplied to the parties as per rules.

File be consigned to Record Room.

 

 

(DR. P.N. TIWARI)                                              (HARPREET KAUR CHARYA)

Member                                                                                Member 

 

           

            (SUKHDEV SINGH)

                                                      President