BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM

VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

PRESENT

SRI. P. SUDHIR                                       :  PRESIDENT

SMT. R. SATHI                                         :  MEMBER

SMT. LIJU B. NAIR                                  :  MEMBER

C.C. No. 215/2017 Filed on 31.05.2017

ORDER DATED: 28.02.2018

Complainant:

R. Viswanathan, Vigi Bhavan, Door No. 3, Santhi Nagar, Market Junction, Peyad P.O, Thiruvananthapuram-695 573.

                                    (Party in person)                                            

Opposite parties:

1. Manager, Lenovo Service Centre, Dreams Mobiles, TDM, Kairali Plaza, Karamana, Thiruvananthapuram-695 002.

2. Managing Director, Lenovo (India) Pvt. Ltd., Ferns Icon, Level 2, Doddena, Kudi Village, Maruthahalli, Outer Ring Road, K.R. Puram, Hobli Bangalore-560 037.

This case having been heard on 30.01.2018, the Forum on 28.02.2018 delivered the following:

ORDER

SRI. P. SUDHIR:  PRESIDENT

Complainant’s case is that complainant purchased a Lenovo mobile phone on 11.12.2016 for Rs. 8,499/- from 2^nd opposite party.  For the last one month touch screen became slow and complainant approached 1^st opposite party for repair.  1^st opposite party demanded money for repair and cost of repair is Rs. 12,500/- and at the same time the new mobile cost only Rs. 8,500/-.  Hence complainant returned the mobile and the mobile is having warranty till 10.11.2017.  Hence complainant approached this Forum for replacement/refund and compensation. 

Notice sent to opposite parties.  Opposite parties 1 & 2 set exparte. 

Issues:

1. Whether there is any consumer relationship between complainant and opposite parties?
2. Whether there is any deficiency of service or unfair trade practice on the part of opposite parties?
3. What is the order as to compensation and cost?

Issue (i):- Complainant filed chief examination affidavit and Exts. P1 and P2 marked.  Perused.  It is seen that Ext. P1 is not in the name of complainant but in the name of one Bindu with different address.  Complainant has no case that he is the beneficiary.  Hence complainant failed to prove the consumer relationship with the opposite party and the first issue found against the complainant.

Issues (ii) & (iii):- Since the first issue found against the complainant there is no scope in discussing the other issues.  Hence the complaint is dismissed. 

In the result, complaint is dismissed without cost.  

A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties free of charge and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room.

Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Forum, this the 28^th day of February 2018.

         Sd/-

P.SUDHIR                             : PRESIDENT

         Sd/-

R. SATHI                               : MEMBER

          Sd/-

LIJU B. NAIR                        : MEMBER

jb

C.C. No. 215/2017

APPENDIX

  I      COMPLAINANT’S WITNESS:

                             NIL

 II      COMPLAINANT’S DOCUMENTS:

P1     - Copy of invoice dated 11.12.2016

P2     - Copy of Lenovo Service Order

III      OPPOSITE PARTY’S WITNESS:

                             NIL

 IV     OPPOSITE PARTY’S DOCUMENTS:

                             NIL

                                                                                                      Sd/-

PRESIDENT

jb