Haryana

Kaithal

211/13

Pardeep Kumar - Complainant(s)

Versus

Ahuja MObile - Opp.Party(s)

Kuldeep Dull

27 Apr 2015

ORDER

Heading1
Heading2
 
Complaint Case No. 211/13
 
1. Pardeep Kumar
vpo Kolekha,Kalayat,Kaithal
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. Ahuja MObile
Kaithal
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. Rajbir Singh PRESIDING MEMBER
 HON'BLE MRS. Harish Mehta MEMBER
 
For the Complainant:Kuldeep Dull, Advocate
For the Opp. Party: Deepak Saini, Advocate
ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPTUES REDRESSAL FORUM, KAITHAL.

Complaint no.211/13.

Date of instt.: 27.09.2013. 

                                                 Date of Decision: .2015.

Pardeep Kumar S/o Sh. Mahinder Singh R/o Village Kolekha, Tehsil Kalayat & Distt. Kaithal.

                                                        ……….Complainant.      

                                        Versus

1. Ahuja Mobile Shop opposite Aggarwal School, Gandhi Park Market, Kaithal-136027, Mobile No.9812216960.

2. Authorized HTC Service Centre, SCO No.152, Ist Fllor, Mugal Canal Market, Karnal-132001.

3. MPS Telecom (P) Ltd. 702-A, Arunachal Building, 19, Barakhabma Road, Cannaught Place, New Delhi.

..……..Opposite Parties.

 

COMPLAINT UNDER SEC. 12 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, 1986.

 

Before:           Sh. Rajbir Singh, Presiding Member.

     Smt. Harisha Mehta, Member.

                       

         

Present :       Sh. Kuldeep Dhull, Advocate for complainant.

Sh. Deepak Saini, Advocate for the opposite party.No.1.

Ops No.2 & 3 already exparte.

                      

                       ORDER

 

(RAJBIR SINGH, PRESIDING MEMBER).

 

                       The complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986, with the averments that he purchased HTC Desire-V phone on 16.02.2013 for sum of Rs.16,000/- bearing Model No.T 32800 IMEI No.352795056180978 and 352795056180986 vide cash memo No.3687 dt. 16.02.2013 from Op No.1 against the      This way, the Ops are deficient in service.  Hence, this complaint is filed.   

2.     Upon notice, the opposite parties appeared before this forum and filed written statement raising preliminary objections with regard to maintainability; cause of action; locus-standi.  There is no deficiency in service on the part of answering Ops.  On merits, the contents of complaint are denied and so, prayed for dismissal of complaint.    

3.     In support of their case, both the parties submitted their affidavits and documents.  

4.     We have heard ld. counsel for both the parties and perused the case file carefully and minutely.

5.     We have perused the complaint & reply thereto and also have gone through the evidence led by the parties. 

 

 

A copy of this order be sent to both the parties free of cost.  File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Announced.

Dt. .2015.

                        (Harisha Mehta),                 (Rajbir Singh),   

                             Member.                              Presiding Member.

 

                                                               

                                       

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Rajbir Singh]
PRESIDING MEMBER
 
[HON'BLE MRS. Harish Mehta]
MEMBER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.