Haryana

Karnal

CC/220/2018

Karatikaa Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Apple Care Centre - Opp.Party(s)

Sukhendra Singh

16 Oct 2018

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM KARNAL.

                                                          Complaint No.220 of 2018

                                                         Date of instt. 31.08.2018

                                                         Date of decision:16.10.2018

 

Karatika Singh daughter of Sukhendra Singh, resident of House no.22/20, 8 Marla Colony, Karnal.                                                                                                                                                                                                          …….Complainant       

                                        Versus

1. Apple Care Centre, shop no.3, 2^nd floor, Super Mall, Sector-12, Karnal through its Manager.

2. Apple Mobile Company, Registered office: no.24, 19^th floor, Concord Tower-C, Vittal Mallya Road, Bangalore-560001, through its C.M.D./Manager.

                                                                ……opposite parties.

 

           Complaint u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.    

Before   Sh. Jaswant Singh……President.       

      Sh.Vineet Kaushik ………..Member

              Dr.Rekha Chaudhary…….Member

 

 Present:  Shri Sukhendra Singh Advocate for complainant.

 

(Jaswant Singh President)

ORDER:                    

                   As per allegations of the complainant that she purchased a mobile I-phone 7 of Apple Company, 128GB IMEI no.355301081423108 from Mobile House near Bhagat Singh Chowk, Jallandhar on 19.09.2017 vide invoice no.T-12611 for the sum of Rs.49,600/-. That after 2-3 days of its purchase there was battery charging problem occurred in the mobile set. So, she approached the service centre of the company at Chandigarh in Sector 32-B. Service Centre repaired the mobile set but the same problem occurred again. Thereafter, complainant approached the service centre for repair of the mobile several times but the official of the service centre could not repair the same. Hence complainant filed the present complaint.

2.             We have heard the learned counsel for the complainant and have gone through the case file carefully.

3.             The copy of the bill indicates that the complainant purchased the mobile set in question from Jallandhar. The complainant also alleged in her complaint that she repaired the mobile set from Service Centre at Chandigarh. No cause of action or part thereof had taken place within the jurisdiction of Karnal District. Therefore, District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Karnal has no jurisdiction to entertain and decide the present complaint. In this regard reliance may be placed upon the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Sonic Surgical Versus National Insurance 2010(1) CLT page 252.

4.             In view of the foregoing circumstances, this Forum at Karnal has got no territorial jurisdiction to entertain and adjudicate the present complaint. Therefore, the complaint is dismissed for want of territorial jurisdiction. However, complainant shall be at liberty to file a fresh complaint before the appropriate forum having jurisdiction in the matter. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Announced:

Dated:16.10.2018

                                                                       

                                                                  President,

                                                           District Consumer Disputes

                                                           Redressal Forum, Karnal.

               

        (Vineet Kaushik)                (Dr. Rekha Chaudhary)

            Member                               Member