Delhi

New Delhi

CC/988/2012

Chakravarti Mahakali - Complainant(s)

Versus

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

31 Aug 2015

ORDER

CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-VI

(DISTT. NEW DELHI), ‘M’ BLOCK, 1^STFLOOR,

VIKAS BHAWAN, I.P.ESTATE,

NEW DELHI-110002.

 

Case No.CC/988/12              Dated:

 

In the matter of:

CORPORAL M. CHAKRAVARTI

MT SECTION(DSS)

21 SQN.AF, C/O 45, WG AF

AIR FORCE STATION, SIRSA

                   ……..COMPLAINANT

         

VERSUS

1.NOKIA INDIA PVT. LTD.

1^ST & 2^ND FLORR,

TOWER ASP INFOCITY

INDISTRIAL PLOT NO-243

UDYOG VIHAR, PHASE-1

GURGAON, HARYANA-122016.

    

 

………. OPPOSITE PARTY

 

 

ORDER

Member :  Ritu Garodia

 

The short facts are that complainant, an Indian Air Force Officer purchase a handset mobile “Nokia N97 Mini” as 31.1.2010 for Rs.26,350/-  The handset was giving same problem and was submitted in service centre as it was within warranty on 18.12.2010, job sheet annexed on 18.2.2011.  A visit was made to repair centre but phone was completely dead and consequently complainant refused to take the handset and complaint was lodged bearing No.1/11/530625509.  He repetitively corresponded with OP and subsequently he received a phone call from OP Company to receive the handset which was not repaired for not being covered under warranty.  He went to Nokia centre multiple time but was not handed over the handset by one Mr. Hemant Gulati, an employee of OP.  On 28.12.2011,  he was finally handed over the handset in mutilated condition Complainant further alleges that IME of his handset and the handset handed over to him was different.  The complainant, combatant member of Member of India Air Force, filed the complaint in Sirsa as he was posted there.  He withdrew the complaint due to lack of jurisdiction and filed it in this Forum.

OP in its pleadings has stated that handset being water logged in out of warranty.  OP has also placed letter dated 19.9.2011 where they have sent a reminder to complainant to collect the handset.

We have considered the argument and perused the pleadings and documents.  Complainant has placed a bill for handset which is Rs.26,350/-  The job sheet dated 18.12.2010 mention major symptom as “Audio: No outgoing audio”  OPs while returning the handset in February, 2011 after two months, failed to explain that handset which was partially working became completely non functional after being handed over to service centre.  Thereafter, OPs had placed on record a letter dated 19.9.2011 without any proof of delivery.  Scrutiny of letter reveals that this was a final reminder but OP has failed to file any previous reminders.  OPs are guilty of deficiency in service in not handing over the handset for more than a year and are directed to refund Rs.26,350/- with 9% interest from filing the claim.  We also award Rs.10,000/- as compensation for harassment caused to complainant for mere repair of mobile handset and Rs.5,000/- as litigation expenses.

The order shall be complied with within 30 days of the receipt of the copy of the order; otherwise action can be taken under Section 25 / 27 of the Consumer Protection Act.

Copy of the order be sent to the parties free

of cost.

Pronounced in open Court on 31.08.2015.

 

 

(C.K.CHATURVEDI)

PRESIDENT

 

 

(RITU GARODIA)

MEMBER