1. Briefly, the claimant purchased mobile No. 8970 of Sagem Company from the defendants in lieu of consideration of Rs, 1500/- on 22.02.09, who provided warranty period of six months of the said mobile. However, the mobile went out of order on 05.04.09, within the warranty period, therefore, the claimant delivered the mobile set to the defendants on 05.04.09, for repair for which the defendants issued receipt No. 1408 and promised to return the same after its repair on 10.04.09. Any how, the defendants again requested a parlance of 3-4 days for return of the mobile but thereafter returned the defective mobile without its repair, hence, after delivery of legal notice through registered cover envelop on 15.04.09, the claimant has lodged this case for recovery of an amount of Rs. 21500/- as damages/compensation but they refused hence, this case under section 25 of PCPA 2005.
2. The defendants refused to serve summons therefore, they were proceeded ex-parte on 22.05.09.
In his ex-parte evidence, the claimant has himself appeared as PW-1, whereas, he has produced Samee Ullah s/o Muhammad Amin as PW-2, who submitted their respective affidavits EX-PW1/1 and EX-PW2/1. In his documentary evidence, the claimant has tendered visiting card EX-P2, warranty card EX-P3, receipt EX-P4, original postal receipt EX-P5, registered envelops EX-P6 and EX-P7, copy of legal notice as Mark "A", copy of notice as Mark "B".
3. As the defendants did not appear to contest the claim despite their service, therefore, several notices were issued to them through registered cover envelop by this court with the warning to them that the claim was lively to be decreed against them that therefore, as a final resort it was intimated to them that if they had any case to defend the claim, they might appear in person in this court otherwise no excuse shall be available to them in this regard. However, despite such hectic efforts of court to procure the defendants attendance none appeared on their behalf.
4. Heard the arguments. Record perused,
5. The affidavit of claimant EX-PW1/1, and that of Samee Ullah EX-PW2/1, have fully corroborated the claimant's version as delineated in the body of the claim which is sufficient to show that the claimant purchased mobile phone from the defendants on 22.02.09, against an amount of Rs.
1500/-, that the defendants provided six months warranty for it but thereafter, refused to repair mobile without any justification hence, the claimant has lodged this case to redress his grievances.
As there is nothing in rebuttal, in support of their versions, therefore, I have been left with no option but to accept the claim.
6. For what have been discussed above. The defendant shall now return the sale price of invoice Rs.
1500/- to the claimant on return of defective mobile to them alongwith compensation/damages amounting to Rs. 5000/-, total amount of Rs. 6500/-. The defendants shall pay the decretal amount to the claimant within 30 days otherwise they shall be dealt with under section 32(2) of PCPA 2005.