Explosion Of Smartphone While Charging, South Delhi District Commission Orders OnePlus To Pay Compensation And Legal Costs

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, South Delhi-II bench comprising of Monika Aggarwal Srivastava (President), Dr. Rajender Dhar (Member) and Ritu Garodia (Member) held OnePlus India culpable for selling a defective mobile phone which exploded and caught fire while it was charging and even after multiple over heating complainants by the complainant the OnePlus did not respond promptly. Further, the bench noted the OnePlus India should be held culpable for selling a defective product that had the potential to cause significant harm to the user. Brief Facts: G.M. Gupta (“Complainant”) had purchased a OnePlus One-64 GB smartphone on 27th January 2015, and the phone exhibited heating issues during its use. The complainant had taken the phone to a service center, which acknowledged the problem but did not offer a solution. On 12th July 2018, the smartphone exploded while it was being charged in the complainant's home. This incident caused damage and posed potential harm, as the phone caught fire. The complainant immediately contacted OnePlus through their Twitter handle, explaining the situation and emphasizing the seriousness of the issue. OnePlus acknowledged the heating issue and requested the handset be deposited at a service center for examination. However, the complainant refused to send the handset in, fearing the loss of custody and requested OnePlus to send a team to inspect the defective phone on-site. Despite assurances, OnePlus did not send anyone to investigate or address the problem. The complainant raised concerns that the battery could have caused a major fire hazard or physical harm to individuals in the vicinity. Aggrieved, the complainant filed a consumer complaint in the South Delhi-II District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (“District Commission”). The complainant sought legal intervention, requesting a restraining order against OnePlus from selling the smartphone in India until they improved safety measures, publicized the risks of exploding handsets, and demanded compensation, including Rs. 25,000 for mental trauma and Rs. 10,000 as litigation cost. On the other hand, OnePlus did not appear before the District Commission or provide any contentions or defense in the case. Observations by the Commission: The District Commission noted that the interactions between the complainant and OnePlus through Twitter, amounted to valid interactions reporting the incident to OnePlus. Initially, OnePlus downplayed the situation, suggesting it might be related to heating issues. Despite the complainant's persistent claims that the device had indeed caught fire, OnePlus requested the handset be sent to a service center for examination. While acknowledging these facts, the District Commission held that given the seriousness of the situation and the potential for harm, OnePlus should have proactively taken responsibility and compensated the user without delay. The District Commission emphasized that safety features in products, especially those commonly used by individuals in close proximity, should adhere to high standards to prevent any mishaps. It stated that once the complainant established that the handset had indeed suffered damage by burning, the burden of proving the absence of a defect or any liability shifted to OnePlus. However, OnePlus failed to meet this obligation. Given the evidence presented by the complainant and OnePlus's failure to respond adequately, the District Commission concluded that OnePlus was guilty of selling a defective product and inadequately addressing the consequences arising from this defect. Consequently, the District Commission ordered OnePlus to pay Rs. 25,000 as compensation to the complainant for the mental trauma, pain, and agony he suffered due to the defective smartphone. Additionally, OnePlus was directed to cover the litigation cost incurred by the complainant during the legal proceedings, amounting to Rs. 10,000. Case: GM Gupta vs OnePlus India Case No.: CC/228/2018 Advocate for the Complainant: N.A. Advocate for the Respondent: N.A. Click Here To Read/Download Order

Explosion Of Smartphone While Charging, South Delhi District Commission Orders OnePlus To Pay Compensation And Legal Costs

Smita Singh

Tags