Mobile Phone Firm Told To Pay Handset Cost, Rs 8000 Relief

The District Consumer Disputes Redress Forum has penalized an electronic company for causing mental harassment and agony to a customer. Of the Rs 8,000 compensation, the forum comprising it’s president G K Dhir and member Jyotsna Thatai ordered Samsung India Electronics Private Limited, Gurugram, to pay Rs 4,000 for mental harassment and agony and an equal amount as litigation expenses to Gurwinder Singh of New Janta Nagar, Gill road, besides paying him Rs 25,000 as the price of the handset.

In his complaint, Gurwinder said he had purchased a mobile phone from Matharoo Mobile Care, Kot Mangal Singh, on August 24, 2017, by paying Rs 25,000 on the assurance that the handset carried a warranty of one year. He got the warranty extended on August 2, 2018, by paying Rs 2,030 to Kiran Mobile Care near Fountain Chowk (service centre of the manufacturer). On August 13, 2018, the complainant approached it for some problem of the mobile phone, after which it prepared a job sheet and assured him to resolve the problem at the earliest.

On August 18, 2018, the complainant received a text message from the centre that the problem had been resolved and that the motherboard of his mobile handset had to be changed and the service centre had not received any spares from the manufacturer. On August 30, 2018, the complainant called at the customer-care centre and thereafter, the service centre prepared the second job sheet on August 27, 2018, without consent of the complainant. On September 1, 2018, a third job sheet was prepared by it. On the plea of deficiency in service, the complaint had filed for a refund of Rs 27,030, along with interest. Compensation for mental agony and harassment of Rs 50,000 and litigation expenses of Rs 11,000 were also claimed. The seller and insurer were declared ex parte in the case.

In a written reply, the manufacturer claimed that the mobile handset has been mishandled by the complainant, due to which it was submitted with the insurer on August 13, 2018, after more than 11 months of extensive usage. After repair of the mobile handset, the insurer called upon the complainant to take the same back, but for reasons best known to the complainant, he did not turn up. It said the complainant had not mentioned any specific irreparable manufacturing defect, nor he claimed any inferior quality of the specific part of the product. Refund of price of mobile has been sought by the complainant, which is not permissible as per terms and conditions of the warranty.

Later, counsel for the manufacturer gave offer through recorded statement that the manufacturer company ready to return the price of handset to complainant as a goodwill gesture provided the original job sheet is returned by him.

The forum observed that the job sheets were changed thrice without the complainant’s consent by the service centre. Besides, the service centre changed his mobile number and so he could not contact the person concerned at the service centre. He repeatedly approached the service centre, but did not get due response. Being so, the complainant is entitled to a reasonable amount of compensation for mental agony and harassment and also litigation expenses.―Times of India