^{UNIONTERRITORY,CHANDIGARH}

Mr.Pardeep Mittal s/o Sh.Parkash Chand, H.No.91, Sector 9, Panchkula.

^{…..Appellant/Complainant}

M/s Samsung Customer Service, Service Centre:- Super tech engineers, Plot No.182/34, Industrial Area, Chandigarh 160001 through its Manager/Authorised Signatory

BEFORE:

Argued by:Sh.Krishan Singla, Adv. for the appellant.

PER PADMA PANDEY, MEMBER

“10]            

2.                    In brief, the facts of the case are that the complainant called the Opposite Party, being the authorized service centre of Samsung, to repair his double door fridge make Samsung, the technician whereof, after inspection told that the fridge would be repaired subject to an estimated repair cost of Rs.8500/-.       

3.                    In its written reply, the Opposite Party admitted the issuance of estimate Annexure C-1.    

4.                    The Parties led evidence, in support of their case.

5.                    After hearing the Counsel for the parties, and, on going through the evidence and record of the case, the District Forum, allowed the complaint, as stated above. 

6.                    Feeling aggrieved against the inadequacy of compensation awarded, the instant appeal, has been filed by the appellant/complainant for enhancement thereof.

7.                    We have heard the Counsel for the appellant, and have gone through the evidence and record of the case, carefully. 

8.                    The Counsel for the appellant submitted that the lump sum compensation to the tune of Rs.10,000/- awarded by the District Forum needs to be enhanced. He further submitted that the Opposite Party never intimated that the spare parts were not available and even it did not send any reply to the legal notice. He further submitted that the appellant already spent more than Rs.10,000/- on litigation. He further submitted that on the contrary, the appellant had lost his double door fridge worth Rs.1 lac. 

9.                    After giving our thoughtful consideration, to the submissions, advanced by the Counsel for the appellant and the evidence, on record, we are of the considered opinion, that the appeal is liable to be dismissed, at the preliminary stage, for the reasons to be recorded hereinafter.     

10.                  It is not the case of the complainant that the fridge was a new one and the same was working when the same was handed over to the Opposite Party for its repairs, rather it was a 9 year old fridge., the principle of law, laid down, by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi, was to the effect that the compensation should be commensurate with loss and injury, suffered by the complainant. 

11.                  The order passed by the District Forum, does not suffer from any illegality or perversity, warranting the interference of this Commission.

12.                  For the reasons recorded above, the appeal, being devoid of merit, must fail, and the same is dismissed, at the preliminary stage, with no order as to costs. The order of the District Forum is upheld.

13.                  Certified Copies of this order be sent to the parties, free of charge.

14.                  The file be consigned to Record Room, after completion

Pronounced.

10.07.2014  Sd/-

[JUSTICE SHAM SUNDER [RETD.]

Sd/-

                                                                       [DEV RAJ]

Sd/-

^{[PADMA PANDEY]}

^MEMBER

cmg