Punjab

Bhatinda

CC/09/353

Rajinder Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Neuron Technologies Nokia - Opp.Party(s)

Sh.Ajay Kumar Advocate

15 Feb 2010

ORDER


District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Bathinda (Punjab)
District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Govt. House No. 16-D, Civil Station, Near SSP Residence, Bathinda-151 001
consumer case(CC) No. CC/09/353

Rajinder Singh
...........Appellant(s)

Vs.

Neuron Technologies Nokia
Goyal Telecome ,
Nokia India Pvt Ltd
...........Respondent(s)


BEFORE:


Complainant(s)/Appellant(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):




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.

ORDER

Statement of Sh.Sukhdev Mittal,counsel for the opposite party No.2.W.O. Stated that opposite party No.2 is ready to refund the payment of Rs. 4,600/- (Rupees Four Thousand Six Hundred Only) for mobile set in question which was purchased on 17.11.08 within 30 days from today against original mobile set in question . RO&AC Member Member President, D.C.F. 15.02.10. Statement of Sh.Ajay Kumar,counsel for the complainant W.O. Stated that I accept the offer of opposite party No.2 as stated by Sh.Sukhdev Mittal,counsel for opposite party No.2. In view of the statement of Sh.Sukhdev Mittal, I may kindly be allowed to withdraw the complaint. I shall handover the original mobile hand set in question to opposite party No.2 through their counsel at same time. RO&AC Member Member President, D.C.F. 15.02.10 15.02.10 Present: Sh. Ajay Kumar,counsel for the complainant Sh.Sukhdev Milttal,counsel for opposite party No.2. Opposite party No.1 already exparte. None for opposite party No.3. Counsel for the opposite party No.2 and complainant have made the above statements, they are bound by their statements. In view of statements of the counsel for the complainant and learned counsel for the opposite party No.2, this complaint is dismissed as withdrawn. The opposite party No.2 is directed to refund the payment of Rs.4,750/- in the shape of cheque and complainant is directed to handover the original mobile hand set in question to opposite party No.2 at the same time. File be consigned. Member Member President, D.C.F.