Kerala

Kollam

CC/187/2010

Murali,Sushus,Thoppilkadavu,Kollam - Complainant(s)

Versus

Proprietor,City Fones,Municipal Buildings,Chinnakkada,Kollam - Opp.Party(s)

B.Krishnakumar

31 Dec 2010

ORDER

Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum
Civil Station,Kollam
Kerala
 
CC NO. 187 Of 2010
 
1. Murali,Sushus,Thoppilkadavu,Kollam
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. Proprietor,City Fones,Municipal Buildings,Chinnakkada,Kollam
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HONORABLE MR. K. VIJAYAKUMARAN : President PRESIDENT
 HONORABLE RAVI SUSHA : Member Member
 HONORABLE VIJYAKUMAR. R : Member Member
 
PRESENT:
 
ORDER

O R D E R

 

R.Vijayakumar, Member.

 

The complaint is filed for getting direction to opposite parties to refund the amount of Rs.4300/- along with interest at the rate of 12%. The complainant prayed for compensation and cost also.

                                            (2)

        The averments in the complaint can be briefly summarized as follows.

 

        The complainant purchased a Samsung mobile Phone no.  E 250 on 20/09/08 for Rs.4300/- from opposite party’s shop. After some days the mobile phone became defective. As per the assurance made by the opposite party at the time of purchase the complainant entrusted the mobile phone to the opposite party for repair. The opposite party assured that the mobile will be given back within two weeks. But they didn’t given back the said phone within the suggested time. Even though the complainant made repeated requests the opposite party failed to return the mobile phone or refund the price of mobile. Hence the complainant filed the complaint.

 

        Even though sufficient opportunities has been given, the opposite party remained absent. Hence set exparte.

 

        The complainant filed affidavit. PW1 examined. Ext. P1 marked.

        The points that would arise for consideration are:

 

1.     Whether there is any deficiency in service from the part of opposite party

2.     Compensation and cost.

(3)

Points (1) & (2)

        As the opposite party remained absent, we are constrained to relay upon the evidence adduced by the complainant. We have perused the documents in detail. We find that there is deficiency in service from the part of opposite party. The points found accordingly.

 

        In the result, the complaint is allowed directing the opposite party to refund Rs.4300/- along with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from 20/09/08 till the date of payment. The opposite party is further directed to pay compensation Rs.1500/- and cost Rs.1000/-.

        The order is to be complied with within one month of the date of receipt of the order.

Dated this the 31st day of December 2010.

Adv.Ravi Susha       :Sd/-

R.Vijayakumar         :Sd/-

INDEX

List of witnesses for the complainant

PW1                                - Murali

List of documents for the complainant

P1                                   - Bill dtd: 20/09/08

 

// Forwarded by Order //

 

                                                             Senior Superintendent

 

 
 
[HONORABLE MR. K. VIJAYAKUMARAN : President]
PRESIDENT
 
[HONORABLE RAVI SUSHA : Member]
Member
 
[HONORABLE VIJYAKUMAR. R : Member]
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.