West Bengal

Kolkata-III(South)

CC/136/2016

Debraj Das - Complainant(s)

Versus

Micromax Mobile Co. Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

08 Jun 2016

ORDER

CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM
KOLKATA UNIT-III(South),West Bengal
18, Judges Court Road, Kolkata 700027
 
Complaint Case No. CC/136/2016
 
1. Debraj Das
S/O Jagannath Das, Vill. Laxmipur, P.O. Kamdebpur, P.S .Patharpatima, Dist- South 24 Parganas, Pin-743371.
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. Micromax Mobile Co. Ltd
M/s. Anannya Infotel, Amarkunja Building Market Complex, C/65,Baghajatin Station Road, P.S.-Jadavpur, Kol-92, (Opp- Allahabad Bank).
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. Satish Kumar Verma PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MRS. Balaka Chatterjee MEMBER
 
For the Complainant:
For the Opp. Party:
ORDER

Judgment :Dt.8.6.2016

           This is a complaint filed by one Debraj Das against Micromax Mobile Co. Ltd. Having its service office at M/s Anannya Infotel, Amarkunja Building, Market Complex, C/65 Baghajatin Station Road.

            Facts in brief are that Complainant purchased a mobile phone Micromax Canvas Doodle 3A102 from the online shopping through Amazon India. Just after three months the mobile did not work. Since it was in warranty period, Complainant went to the service centre at M/s Anannya Infotel where one software was down loaded but the problem remained the same. After that Complainant was advised to deposit the phone to the service centre. But he did not deposit because service centre refused to handover him an old phone for his use. Thereafter, through speed post, Complainant lodged the grievance, but of no use. So, Complainant filed this case for either exchange of the mobile or payment of Rs.6,898/- which he paid for purchasing the mobile and also Rs.35,000/- as compensation and Rs.1,000/- as litigation cost.

            On the basis of the above facts, the case was admitted and notice was served. But OP did not appear. So, the case was heard ex-parte.

Decision with reasons

            Complainant files document and warranty card. On perusal of that it appears that Complainant purchased the mobile and he could not use it. Further, it appears that service centre did not provide any relief and so Complainant was compelled to file this case.

            On perusal of the paper submitted by Complainant and the warranty card it appears that Complainant as a consumer suffered after purchasing the mobile. So this is a fit case for a direction upon the service centre for exchanging the mobile or paying the price which Complainant paid.

Hence

O R D E R E D

            CC/136/2016 and the same is allowed ex-parte.

          OP is directed to exchange the mobile of the Complainant within two months of this order alternatively to pay Rs.6,898/- within this period. OP is also directed to pay  litigation cost of Rs.1,000/- to the Complainant within this period.

            Then CC/136/2016 stands disposed of. 

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Satish Kumar Verma]
PRESIDENT
 
[HON'BLE MRS. Balaka Chatterjee]
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.