View 209 Cases Against Philips
Nitin Tyagi Nitin Tyagi filed a consumer case on 13 Sep 2019 against Philips India Limited in the New Delhi Consumer Court. The case no is CC/185/2018 and the judgment uploaded on 09 Oct 2019.
CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-VI
(DISTT. NEW DELHI),
‘M’ BLOCK, 1STFLOOR, VIKAS BHAWAN, I.P.ESTATE,
NEW DELHI-110001
Case No.C.C./185/2018 Dated:
In the matter of:
Nitin Tyagi,
S/o Sh. Devender Tyagi,
Address - Chamber No.13,
Patiala House,
New Delhi-110020.
…… Complainant
Versus
Delhi (Lajpat Nagar) BR,
K-11/25, Central Market,
Lajpat Nagar.
c-152, Okhala Industrial Area Ph.I,
Near Cannon Building,
Okhala Phase-1.
8th Floor,dlf9-13
DLF Cyber City,
Sec.25, DLF Ph.3,
Gurgaon-122002
DLF Cyber City,
Sec.25, DLF Ph.3,
Gurgaon-122002
24, Ashoka Estate 9th Floor,
Connaught Place,
New Delhi-01.
……. Opposite parties
NIPUR CHANDNA, MEMBER
ORDER
The complainant has filed the present complaint against the OP under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The brief facts as alleged in the complaint are that on 24.01.2016 the complainant purchased PHILIP LED TV against Invoice No.302-DLJ01-16DNFWP 237, for a sum of Rs.45,000/- from OP-1. In the month of February, 2018 the LED in question started creating problem such as volume was dead. As such the complainant make several calls to OP-2 & 3 customer care number but they did not responsd to his complaint. Thereafter, the complainant approached OP-1 and requested him to either repair or replace the LED in question but OP-1 denied for replacement and repair of the said LED and asked to contact with OP-3 & 5. The complainant contacted to OP-5 telephonically and requested it to rectify the problem of his LED but all in vain. The complainant has also filed a complaint before Mediation Centre, Parliament Street for settlement issue, however despite service of dasti notice issued by Mediation Centre, OPs did not aspiration to appear before the Hon’ble Mediation Centre. The non-repair of the LED in question by OPs amounts to deficiency in services, complainant, therefore, approached this Forum for redressal of his grievance.
2. Notices were issued to all the OPs. OP—1 & 2 appeared but failed to file their written statement. Thereafter, none appeared on behalf of OPs, hence, they were ordered to be proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 20.11.2018.
3. Complainant has filed his evidence by way of affidavit.
4. We have heard argument advance at the Bar by the complainant and have perused the record.
5. Complainant has placed on record the copy of Invoice dt. 24.1.2016, he has also placed on record the copy of the documents granting 5 years comprehensive warranty against the LED in question by OP-1.
6. From the un-rebutted testimony of the complainant and documents placed on record, we are convince that story put forth by complainant is true. Perusal of the complaint along with annexures shows that the complainant has paid an amount of Rs.45,000/- against the LED in question but he cannot enjoyed its fruit as being a defective one .Non-repairing or replacement of LED in question amounts to deficiency in services. We, therefore, hold all the OPs guilty of deficiency in services and directed them as under:
i. All the OPs are jointly and severally liable to replace the LED in question with new one after receiving the LED in question within 30 days from today free of cost.
ii. Pay to the complainant a sum of Rs.2,000/- as compensation on account of pain and mental agony suffered by him which will also include the cost of litigation.
Copy of the order may be forwarded to the parties to the case free of cost as statutorily required. The orders be uploaded on www.confonet.nic.in.
Announced in open Forum on 13/09/2019.
(ARUN KUMAR ARYA)
PRESIDENT
(NIPUR CHANDNA) (H M VYAS)
MEMBER MEMBER
Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes
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.