##PAGE1##

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission- VIII (Central)

(Govt. of NCT of Delhi)

5^th Floor, Maharana Pratap Inter State Bus Terminal Building ISBT Kashmere Gate, Delhi- 110006

Consumer Complaint No.: DC/77/CC/120/2022 In the matter of

Koti Sai Pavan S/o Shri Samba Siva Rao R/o Ground Floor, 34/1, Old Rajendra Nagar,

Delhi-110080 … Complainant Vs.

Realme Mobile Telecommunication (India) Pvt. Ltd.

Through its Directors

1.Shri Madhav Seth

2. Shri DU Hongzhao

Registered office at : 3^rd Floor, Tower-B, Building Number-8, DLF Cyber City,

Gurugram(Haryana)-122002 … Opposite Party

ORDER

07.04.2026 (Dr. Rashmi Bansal, Member)

By the present order, this Commission is disposing of the complaint filed by the complainant alleging deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party (OP), which has caused him financial loss, physical injury, mental harassment,

and agony due to the defective product sold to him.

1. It is the case of the complainant that he purchased a mobile phone, namely Realme XT model, on 06.10.2019, bearing IMEI No. 866121045031637, having 6 GB RAM and 64 GB internal memory, for a consideration of ₹18,000/- from the OP. The complainant submits that, being a civil services aspirant, he came to Delhi from his native place and joined a coaching centre for his studies on payment of ₹1,42,000/- for one cycle of UPSC examination. The preliminary examination was scheduled for 05.06.2022, for which he had been preparing for a long time. However, on 04.06.2022 at about 3:00 AM, while the complainant

DC/77/CC/120/2022 Page 1 of 7

was sleeping and his mobile phone was lying near him, he heard a strange sound. Upon waking up, the mobile phone suddenly exploded in his hand with a bursting sound and caught fire. As a result, the complainant suffered injuries due to the explosion, including 1° burn on his left arm, upper arm and left forehead, and

blisters on the ring and middle fingers of both hands.

2. It is further submitted that due to the aforesaid incident, the complainant suffered mental trauma and had to rush to the hospital for medical treatment, and consequently, he could not appear in the examination scheduled on 05.06.2022. The complainant submits that he is still undergoing treatment in a government hospital and is unable to seek treatment in a hospital of his choice due to limited financial resources. It is also submitted that, as on the date of filing of the complaint, he had not regained full strength in his injured left hand. The complainant further submits that he had invested his father’s retirement savings in coaching, and he himself works in a library to meet his expenses. He had taken a room on rent at ₹5,000/- per month, which expenditure was rendered futile as he could not appear in the examination. The complainant attributes responsibility to the OP, alleging that the mobile phone was defective and failed to meet

standard safety norms applicable to similar products.

3. The complainant visited the authorised service centre of the OP company and reported the incident of mobile explosion, requesting replacement of the mobile phone, as he apprehended that the device was unsafe. However, the service centre informed him that only repair was possible, and the complainant deposited the mobile phone vide Job Card No. E01–8220609015 dated 09.06.2022. Thereafter, on 11.07.2022, when the complainant visited the service centre to collect the repaired mobile phone, he was asked to sign an acknowledgement stating that the damage to the phone was user-induced. The complainant refused to sign the said acknowledgement, and upon such refusal, the OP’s service centre declined to return the mobile phone. The complainant

DC/77/CC/120/2022 Page 2 of 7

submits that his room partner was an eyewitness to the incident, whose evidence has also been filed.

4. The complainant submits that he continues to undergo treatment in a government hospital and suffer from mental and physical pain and has not regained full strength