Kerala

Kasaragod

CC/14/196

Rajan.V.K. - Complainant(s)

Versus

Proprietor - Opp.Party(s)

09 Jan 2015

ORDER

C.D.R.F. Kasaragod
Kerala
 
Complaint Case No. CC/14/196
 
1. Rajan.V.K.
S/o Late M.Chathukkutti Nambiar, NGO Quatras, B Block, B6, Udayagiri, Vidyanagar P.O, Kasaragod - 671123
Kasaragod
Kerala
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. Proprietor
3D Mobile Store, Victoria Complex, New Bus stand, Kasaragod
Kasaragod
Kerala
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MRS. P.RAMADEVI PRESIDENT
 HONABLE MRS. Beena.K.G. MEMBER
 HON'BLE MRS. Shiba.M.Samuel MEMBER
 
For the Complainant:
For the Opp. Party:
ORDER

D.o.F:19/9/2014

D.o.O:24/01/2015

IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KASARAGOD

                                          CC.NO.196/14

                  Dated this, the 24th     day of  January 2015

PRESENT:

SMT.P.RAMADEVI           : PRESIDENT

SMT.BEENA K.G               : MEMBER

SMT.SHIBA.M.SAMUEL    : MEMBER

Rajan.V.K, S/o Late M Chathukutty Nambiar,

NGO      Quarters,B Block,B6,

Udayagiri, Vidyanagar, PO,                                            : Complainant

Kasaragod.

(in person)

 

Proprietor,  3 D Mobile Store,

Victoria Complex, New Busstand ,Kasaragod.        : Opposite party

(Exparte)

                                                                                    ORDER

SMT.P.RAMADEVI           : PRESIDENT

 

  The facts of the complaint in brief  are as follows

   That the complainant purchased a mobile phone from opposite party on 24/8/2014  for an amount of Rs.5600/-.  After 2 days of its purchase the  touch screen of the phone was not working and approached opposite party and the opposite party told him that it is a memory problem  and if some of the memories deleted it will be working.  Thus the opposite party deleted some memories.  Then after 6 days the problem again started and the complainant informed the same to the opposite party.  But the  opposite party instead of giving any  service.   He asked the  complainant to approach the service centre.  The complainant is do not want to go to the service centre.  He demanded replacement of the mobile phone.  But the opposite party refused  to replace  the mobile phone.  Hence this complaint is filed for necessary relief.

   Opposite party duly served the notice remained absent  and set exparte.  Complainant filed proof affidavit and Ext.A1 marked.

  Heard the complainant and documents perused.  Ext.A1 is the cash bill.  Ext.A1 shows the date of purchase on 29/8/14 and the  complaint was filed on 16/9/14 ie, within 18 days of  its purchase.  Denial of after sale service is an unfair trade practice.  Here the opposite party eventhough he received the notice from the  Forum but neither appeared nor  adduced any contra evidence.  Hence the complaint is  allowed directing the opposite party to  pay Rs.5600/- being the price of the mobile phone to the complainant and also directed to pay Rs.2000/- towards cost of the proceedings.  On receiving the amount complainant is directed to return the mobile phone with accessories to the opposite party.  Time for compliance is 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order

Ext.A1- cash bill

Sd/                                                                   Sd/                                                           Sd/

MEMBER                                              MEMBER                                        PRESIDENT

eva

/Forwarded by Order/

SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT

 
 
[HON'BLE MRS. P.RAMADEVI]
PRESIDENT
 
[HONABLE MRS. Beena.K.G.]
MEMBER
 
[HON'BLE MRS. Shiba.M.Samuel]
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.