Date:09/04/2005 URL: http://www.thehindu.com/2005/04/09/stories/2005040908850300.htm

Andhra Pradesh - Others

Cellphone dealer asked to pay compensation

By B. Prabhakara Sarma

VISAKHAPATNAM:, A mobile phones dealer in the city has been directed by the Visakhapatnam District Consumer Forum to pay compensation to consumers along with costs within one month.

A resident of Thatichetlapalem, A. Muralikrishna, bought a Samsung C 100 model mobile phone for Rs. 8,200 from Nutakki Enterprises in Dabagardens in December 2003. But right from the day of purchase, he could not enjoy it as it presented many problems such as poor signals and low voice. He took the cellular phone to the dealer for repairs repeatedly and left it with the latter for repairs. Whenever he went to collect the cellphone, the dealer did not respond properly, behaved recklessly and postponed the matter on one pretext or the other.

Legal notice

Then the consumer got issued a legal notice in April last but the dealer did not respond. He later filed a complaint (Consumer Dispute No: 75/2005) in the Forum for refund of the cost of the cellphone with interest, damages, and cost of litigation.

Though notices were served on the opposite party (OP), it did not choose to respond.

The Forum president, C. Rambabu, and members -- D. Suseela and G. Viswanatha Reddy -- in their verdict on Wednesday, noted that though the OP did not respond, it could not be said that it was unaware of the facts.

``In the absence of any contradictory evidence, we have no hesitation to hold that the OP has sold a defective cellphone set with all problems and though warranty was there for rectification. OP failed to rectify defects and return the cell phone. The attitude of selling defective cellphone definitely amounts to unfair trade practice and failure to rectify defects or replace the cell phone amounts to deficiency in service,'' they held.

They directed the OP to rectify the defects in the cellphone and deliver it to the consumer with a fresh warranty of six months or replace it with a new one with fresh warranty of six months, failing which the OP should refund Rs.8,200 with nine per cent interest per annum. They awarded Rs.3,000 as compensation and Rs.500 towards cost of litigation to be paid within a month.

In a similar case, Pragada Sashank of Maddilapalem who purchased a Nokia 3310 mobile phone with battery for Rs. 3,450 in May last from the same Nutakki Enterprises after the latter gave wide publicity saying that the set was covered by insurance also, faced problems with the set. The OP threw the blame on BSNL tower, and after several trips to the dealer for repairs, the OP informed the consumer that it had to send the set to Vijayawada for rectification. After the set was sent to the Vijayawada service centre, the consumer had to make several trips to the dealer in vain.

During his visits, the consumer noticed many customers raising disputes with the dealer with respect to sale of defective sets. He lost confidence in the dealer and gave a legal notice. Later, he filed a complaint (CD 76/2005) in the Forum against Nutakki Enterprises represented by its proprietor, Venugopal, for damages and costs.

In this case, the Forum directed the OP to repay Rs. 3,450, the cost of the mobile phone set with nine per cent interest from August 16 last year till the date of realisation, along with Rs. 3,000 towards compensation and Rs. 500 towards costs.