Chandigarh

DF-I

CC/271/2015

Sh. Rajesh Kumar - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s Nokia Care Center - Opp.Party(s)

Kulwinder Singh

16 Sep 2015

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-I, U.T. CHANDIGARH

============

Consumer Complaint  No	:	CC/271/2015
Date  of  Institution	:	04/05/2015
Date   of   Decision	:	16/09/2015

 

 

 

 

 

Rajesh Kumar son of Sh.Manchand, resident of H.No. 3082, 1^st Floor, Sector 71, Mohali.

….Complainant

Vs.

 

1.   M/s Nokia Care Centre, Quite Office No.11, Sector 35-A, Opposite Khukhiran Bhawan, Chandigarh – 160035, through its Manager.

 

2.   M/s Nokia Solutions & Network Pvt. Ltd., 7^th – 8^th Floor, Building 9A, Sector 25-A, DLF Cyber City, Gurgaon, Haryana, through its Director.

 

3.   M/s Aadidev International, Nokia Priority Partner, 1001, Sector 22-B, Chandigarh, through its Proprietor.

 

…… Opposite Parties

 

BEFORE:   SH. P.L. AHUJA               PRESIDENT

MRS.SURJEET KAUR             MEMBER

          SH. SURESH KUMAR SARDANA     MEMBER

 

For Complainant	:	Sh. Kulwinder Singh, Advocate.
For OP Nos. 1 & 2	:	Sh. Gaurav Bhardwaj, Advocate.
For OP No.3	:	Ex-parte.

 

PER SURESH KUMAR SARDANA, MEMBER

 

 

 

          Tersely, the facts and material, culminating in the commencement, relevant for the disposal of the instant Consumer Complaint and emanating from the record are that, the Complainant had purchased a Nokia Lumia-630 mobile handset on 20.05.2014 from Opposite Party No.3 for Rs.10,600/-, with one year warranty, vide bill Annexure C-1. It has been alleged that the said mobile handset stopped working after two months of its purchase. The Complainant immediately approached the Opposite Party No.1, for the replacement of defective handset, where the original battery of the handset was lost by it (OP No.1). Thereafter, the Complainant requested the Opposite Party No.1 to provide new battery for the handset concerned, in order to enable it in working condition, upon which he was told to wait for one week as the battery concerned was out of stock. The Complainant thereafter visited the Opposite Parties No.1 & 2 on several occasions, but the battery was not provided by the Opposite Parties. Finding no other alternative the Complainant lodged an online Complaint on 4.8.2014, in response to which the Nokia Care Representative assured that Complainant that his grievance would be solved at the earliest (Annex.C-2). Thereafter, the Nokia Care Executive called the Complainant and assured him that the battery in question would be available in the next 15 days. Even after the expiry of the time given by the Nokia Care Executive, the battery of the handset was not provided by the Opposite Parties. Thereafter, the Complainant again enquired from the Nokia Customer Care for such a huge delay, but no reasonable answer was given. The Complainant again visited the Opposite Parties No.1 & 2 and raised his grievance, but all in vain and further refused to listen the genuine request of the Complainant. Eventually, the Complainant served a legal notice upon the Opposite Parties (Annexure C-3 & C-4), but the same failed to yield any desired results. When all the frantic efforts made by the Complainant, failed to fructify, as a measure of last resort, alleging that the aforesaid acts of the Opposite Parties tantamount to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice, the Complainant has filed the instant Complaint u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, seeking various reliefs. 

  

2.     Notice of the complaint was sent to Opposite Parties, seeking their version of the case.

 

3.     The Opposite Party No.3 did not turn up despite service, hence it was proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 29.07.2015.

 

4.     Opposite Parties No.1 & 2 in their joint written statement, while admitting the factual aspects of the case, have pleaded that the Complainant approached the answering Opposite Party No.1 for purchasing a new battery, as he had lost his battery. The battery can only be purchased on payment basis, as the warranty was only to repair/ replace the defective parts and not to replace the lost parts. It has been asserted that the battery was available with the answering Opposite Parties, but the Complainant was adamant to get the battery free of cost from them. Denying all other allegations and stating that there is no deficiency in service on their part, answering Opposite Parties have prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

 

5.     The Complainant also filed replication to the written statement filed by the Opposite Parties No.1 & 2, wherein the averments as contained in the complaint have been reiterated and those as alleged in the written statement by the Opposite Parties No.1 & 2 have been controverted.

 

6.     Parties were permitted to place their respective evidence on record in support of their contentions.

 

7.     We have heard the learned Counsel for the Complainant and Opposite Parties No.1 & 2 (Opposite Party No.3 being ex-parte) and have perused the record, along with the written arguments filed on behalf of both the sides.

 

8.     We have perused Annexure C-2 (), which is an e-mail sent by the Complainant to contactcentre.india@microsoft.com, wherein he has himself admitted that he has lost his phone battery on 25.07.2014. However, the Complainant has miserably failed to place on record any such agreement under which the Opposite Parties are duty bound to provide/replace the battery, if lost, free of cost. Furthermore, the Complainant has also failed to produce the receipt towards the cost of the battery deposited, if any, with the Opposite Parties. In the absence of the above agreement/receipt, this Forum cannot hold Opposite Parties guilty of deficiency in service/unfair trade practice. 

 

9.     In view of the above findings, we are of the opinion that the present Complaint merits dismissal and the same is accordingly dismissed, leaving the parties to bear their own costs.

 

10.     The certified copy of this order be sent to the parties free of charge, after which the file be consigned.

Announced

16^th September, 2015                                

Sd/-

(P.L. AHUJA)

PRESIDENT

 

 

 Sd/-

(SURJEET KAUR)

MEMBER

 

 

Sd/-

(SURESH KUMAR SARDANA)

MEMBER