BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, AMRITSAR.
Consumer Complaint No. 703 of 2017
Date of Institution: 29.09.2017
Date of Decision: 10.01.2018
Harpreet Singh son of Sh.Sawinder Singh, resident of Kala Nangal, Tehsil Batala, District Gurdaspur, presently Amritsar-Mobile No.9646200751.
Complainant
Versus
- Lenovo (India) Private Limited, Ferns Icon, Level 2, Doddenakundi Village Marathahalli Outer Ring Road, KR Puran Hobli, Bangalore-560037 through its Managing Director.
- M/s. Space Electronics, Hall Bazar, Amritsar through its Proprietor.
- Electronics-CSR, Ist Floor, Kamal Tower, Near Kamal Place, Batala Road, Amritsar through its Proprietor.
Opposite Parties
Complaint under section 12 & 13 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (as amended upto date).
Present: For the Complainant: Sh.S.S.Batra, Advocate.
For Opposite Parties No.1 and 2: Exparte.
For Opposite Party No.3 : Sh.Vikas, representative.
Coram
Sh.Anoop Sharma, Presiding Member
Ms.Rachna Arora, Member.
Order dictated by:
Ms.Rachna Arora, Member
1. The complainant has brought the instant complaint under section 12 & 13 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 on the allegations that the complainant through his friend namely Vijay Masih purchased one mobile hand phone of Lenovo K Note bearing IMEI No.860933038065877 from Opposite Party No. 2 for total sale consideration of rs.11,500/- vide bill No. 10895 dated 11.1.2017. Opposite Party No.1 is manufacturer of the Mobile Set in question whereas Opposite Party No. 2 and Opposite Party No.3 are its authorized agent and service centre of Lenovo company respectively. In the month of August, 2017 the Mobile Set in question made troubles and did not work properly and accordingly the complainant approached Opposite Party No. 2 who referred to the complainant with Opposite Party No.3 because the Mobile Set in question was under guarantee with bill and as such, the complainant approached Opposite Party No.3 and came to know that the display and mother board of the Mobile Set in question has not been working properly and Opposite Party No.3 kept the Mobile Set in question with them for its repair and removing the defects and issued job sheet accordingly and assured that the Mobile Set in question will be repaired as early as possible and they gave time of 7 days. After seven days, the complainant approached Opposite Party No.3 , but they asked to take one more week for its repair or otherwise they shall replace the Mobile Set in question with new one, but inspite of the commitment, the Opposite Parties have failed to replace the Mobile Set in question. The aforesaid acts of the Opposite Parties for not providing the proper service after commitment and then not replacing the Mobile Set in question with new one is an act of deficiency in services, mal practices, Unfair Trade Practice, inconvenience for which the Opposite Parties are liable to pay the compensation of Rs.50,000/- to the complainant. Vide instant complaint, the complainant has sought the following reliefs.
a) Opposite Parties may be directed to refund the amount of Rs.11,500/- with interest.
b) Opposite Parties be directed to pay the compensation of Rs.50,000/- to the complainant.
c) Opposite Parties be directed to pay the adequate cost of the litigation.
d) Any other relief to which the complainant is found entitled under the law and equity may also be awarded to him.
Hence, this complaint.
2. Upon notice, one appeared on behalf of Opposite Parties No.1 and 2 and consequently, they were proceeded against exparte. But however, at later stage, Sh.Vikas representative appeared on behalf of Opposite Party No.3 and stated that the company is ready to effect compromise with the complainant and seeks some time for compromise and on his request, the case was adjourned for today i.e. 10.1.2018 for compromise. At this stage, the complainant made statement before this Forum to the effect that he has received today in the Forum a new mobile handset Lenovo K Note from Opposite Party No.3 with the assurance of one year warranty started from today and he has also stated that he has been harassed at the hands of the Opposite Parties. As such, he pressed for compensation and costs.
3. In view of the statement made by the complainant today i.e. on 10.01.2018, we are of the view that though the complainant has received the new Mobile Set from Opposite Party No.3, but he was compelled to file the present complaint by spending huge amount on the documentation and by hiring advocate, so we also direct all the Opposite Parties jointly and severally to pay Rs.500/- as compensation besides Rs.500/- as costs of litigation to the complainant. Copies of the order be furnished to the parties free of costs. File is ordered to be consigned to the record room. Case could not be disposed of within the stipulated period due to heavy pendency of the cases in this Forum.
Announced in Open Forum
Dated: 10.01.2018. (Rachna Arora) (Anoop Sharma)
Member Presiding Member
