West Bengal

Kolkata-III(South)

CC/488/2016

Indrajit Gupta - Complainant(s)

Versus

Neosa Electronic Pvt. Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

03 Mar 2017

ORDER

CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM
KOLKATA UNIT-III(South),West Bengal
18, Judges Court Road, Kolkata 700027
 
Complaint Case No. CC/488/2016
 
1. Indrajit Gupta
S/O laljee Prsad Gupta, R/O B/1A Drainage Canal, Ichapur, Lake View Housing Complex H/41/1, Ichapore water than, Howrah-711104.
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. Neosa Electronic Pvt. Ltd.
158, S.p. Mikherjee Road, Kol-26, P.S.-Tollygunge.
2. Sony Pvt. Ltd.
PS Arcadia Central,5th Floor, Plot No 4A, Abaninda Nath Thakur Sarani (Camac Street) Kol-17.
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. Satish Kumar Verma PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MRS. Balaka Chatterjee MEMBER
 HON'BLE MR. Ayan Sinha MEMBER
 
For the Complainant:
For the Opp. Party:
Dated : 03 Mar 2017
Final Order / Judgement

Judgment : Dt.3.3.2017

            This is a complaint made by one Indrajit Gupta against Neosa Electronics Pvt. Ltd., OP No.1 and Sky India Pvt. Ltd., OP No.2 praying for refund of Rs.19,379/- along with 18% interest and compensation of Rs.30,000/- with litigation cost of Rs.20,000/-.

            Facts in brief are that Complainant purchased on 4.4.2015 one mobile set Sony Xperia Z Ultra model, which was manufactured on 6.2.2015 as per document annexed after paying Rs.19,379/-. Since beginning this mobile did not function properly. Complainant purchased this with down payment of Rs.7,500/- after exchanging his old mobile on 13.1.2015. Unfortunately, mobile fell in a bucket containing water. Complainant picked up the mobile and checked it and found it was working. But, on the next day trouble started as the display was not showing and there was no sound for incoming call. Thereafter, Complainant wrote an e-mail to Customer department but nothing was done. So, Complainant filed this complaint.

            On the basis of above facts, complaint was admitted & notices were served. But, OP did not appear. So, the case was heard ex-parte.

Decision with reasons:

            Complainant files affidavit-in-chief and certain copies of documents. On perusal letter dt.3.2.2016, it appears that an e-mail was sent to the Complainant, stating that the product was examined and it was found liquid engrossed even if the product is within warranty, liquid engression is not taken into account. Further, Company stated that it can only be exchanged if Complainant pays 80% of the retail price. Further, on perusal of other documents, it appears that Sony Co. used to advertise for promoting sale that the product was waterproof and dust resistance. In the circumstances, we find fit that Co. made unfair trade practice and for that Complainant is entitled to refund of Rs.19,379/- and also compensation of Rs.5,000/-.

            Hence,

ordered

            CC/488/2016 is allowed ex-parte in part. OPs are directed to refund of Rs.19,379/- with Rs.5,000/- as compensation within 3 months of this order, in default, the amount shall carry interest 10% p.a.

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