Maharashtra

Central Mumbai

CC/14/1

MR.DATTARAM S. RAJESHIRKE, - Complainant(s)

Versus

NEXT CONNECTION THROUGH MANAGER,PROPIRTOR - Opp.Party(s)

18 Sep 2014

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CENTRAL MUMBAI
Puravatha Bhavan, 2nd Floor, General Nagesh Marg, Near Mahatma Gandhi Hospital
Parel, Mumbai-400 012
 
Complaint Case No. CC/14/1
 
1. MR.DATTARAM S. RAJESHIRKE,
C1/12,DNYANESHWAR NAGAR,CHS LTD. R.A.KIDWAI ROAD SEWRI-WADALA,MUMBAI-400 031
MUMBAI
MAHARASHTRA
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. NEXT CONNECTION THROUGH MANAGER,PROPIRTOR
3,A/B SHIV KOLIVADA CHS.LTD.GALA NO.8/9,ROAD NO.28SION-KOLIWADA(EAST),MUMBAI-400 022
MUMBAI
MAHARASHTRA
2. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR,SAMSUNG,
SOUTHWST ASIA HADQUARTRS,2ND,3RD & 4TH FLOOR, TOWR-C,VIPULTCH SQUAR,SCTOR-43,GOLF COURS ROAD,GURGAON
GURGAON
MAHARASHTRA
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'ABLE MR. B.S.WASEKAR PRESIDENT
 HON'ABLE MR. H.K.BHAISE MEMBER
 
For the Complainant:
For the Opp. Party:
ORDER

PER.MR.B.S.WASEKAR, HON’BLE PRESIDENT

1)                The present complaint has been filed by the complainant u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. According to Complainant he had purchased Samsung Mobile having Model No. S6312MSA Metallic Silver on 31 August, 2013 from Samsung Gallery. He had produced bill on record. It was defective therefore he approached the opponents. The Opponent no. 1 repaired it and claimed expenses of Rs. 3,337/-. As it was within warranty period, the complainant refused to pay the expenses. The Opponents failed to replace the mobile handset in spite of several request. It is still lying with opponents therefore he has filled this complaint for refund of the purchase amount along with compensation and legal charges.

2)      Both the opponents are duly served but, they remained absent therefore matter is proceed ex-party. The complainant has produced bill showing the purchase of mobile handset. He has also filled his affidavit to support his complaint. It remained unchallenged. As per bill on record the complainant has purchased this handset for Rs. 7,200/- (Seven Thousand Two Hundred only). As the handset is defective and the opponents failed to replace it within warranty period, the opponents are liable to refund the purchase amount of Rs 7,200/- to the complainant. In spite of request the opponents failed to replace the handset. Thereby the complainant suffered from mental agony. Therefore he is entitled for compensation of Rs. 5,000/-. Besides this the complaint is entitled for cost of this proceeding Rs. 3,000/- Hence, we proceed to passed the following order.

ORDER

  1. Complaint is allowed.
  2. The opponents are directed to pay Rs. 7,200/- (Rs.Seven Thousand Two Hundred Only) to the complainant with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filling i.e. 6th January, 2014 till its realization.
  3. The opponents are further directed to pay Rs.5,000/- (Rs.Five Thousand Only) to the complainant as Copensation towards Mental agony.
  4. The opponents are further directed to pay Rs.3,000/- (Rs.Three Thousand Only) to the complainant as cost of this proceeding.
  5. The above order shall be complied with within a period of one month from today.
  6. Copies of this order be sent to the parties free of cost.

 

Dictated & Pronounced on 18rd September, 2014

 
 
[HON'ABLE MR. B.S.WASEKAR]
PRESIDENT
 
[HON'ABLE MR. H.K.BHAISE]
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.