1. Briefly, the claimant/consumer purchased a mobile phone Nokia 1202 from the defendant on 08.08.2009, in lieu of consideration of Rs.2200/- through invoice bill No12308. The claimant/consumer opened seal box containing above said mobile phone when it was disclosed to his astonishment in presence of Adel Hameed and Shahid Shafiq that its battery and back cover were not of the same model 1202, hence, he lodged a protest to the defendant and requested him to return the defective product but he refused, hence, this case u/s 25 of PCPA 2005, for recovery of Rs.22200/- as price of the mobile set and compensation.
2. As the claim was prima facie, maintainable in pursuance of the report of Registrar of this court and it was within prescribed time limit, there being neither existing system of redress nor the regulatory system of individual claims, the defendant was summoned to appear in person. The defendant was served in person on the summons against him but none appeared for him despite repeated calls since morning till the fag end hours of the court, therefore, he was proceeded against ex-parte.
3. In his ex-parte evidence, the claimant has got recorded his own statement as PW1, through his affidavit EX-PW1/1, whereas he has produced Shahid Shafiq PW2 and Adel Hameed PW3, through their respective affidavits, EX-PW2/1 and EX-PW3/1. In his documentary evidence, the claimant/consumer has tendered invoice EX-P1.
4. After conclusion of claimant's ex-parte evidence on 23.10.2009, the defendant was issued notice as a final resort through Registered Post that if he had any case to defend the claim, might appear in person for today that otherwise, no excuse shall be available to him in this regard. Any how, none is present for the defendant even today.
5. Heard the arguments, record perused.
6. The claimant/consumer has fully corroborated the contents of claim through his affidavit EX- PW1/1. The said Shahid Shafiq and Adel Hameed have also sworn affidavits in favour of the claimant to the same effect. From all such evidence, it appeared that the defendant sold mobile phone Nokia 1202 to the claimant in packed box but that its battery and mobile cover were not of the same quality therefore, product is defective to this extent. EX-P1, is the receipt showing that the claimant/consumer purchased the mobile set for consideration of Rs.2200. There is no evidence in rebuttal. The claim stands proved in view of the evidence of the consumer referred above hence, accepted.
7. For what has been discussed above, the defendants shall now return price of mobile of Rs.2200/- to the claimant and an amount of Rs 10000/- as legal expenses/lawyer's fee incurred by him in this case total amount of Rs.12200/- within a period of 30 days, otherwise the matter shall be dealt with under section 32(2) of PCPA2005. However, the claimant/consumer shall return the defective mobile set to the defendant on receipt of the above said decreetal amount. File be consigned to the record room after its due completions.