Chandigarh

DF-II

CC/669/2009

Mr. Kapil Dev - Complainant(s)

Versus

Salora International Limited, - Opp.Party(s)

Sanjay Kumar,

10 Jun 2010

ORDER


CHANDIGARH DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-IIPlot No. 5-B, Sector 19-B, Madhya marg, Chandigarh - 160019
CONSUMER CASE NO. 669 of 2009
1. Mr. Kapil Dev R/o # 359, Ground floor, Sector 44/A, Chandigarh. ...........Respondent(s)


For the Appellant :Sanjay Kumar,, Advocate for
For the Respondent :

Dated : 10 Jun 2010
ORDER

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.

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II
U.T. CHANDIGARH
 
                        Complaint Case No.: 669 of 2009
 Date of Inst:11.05.2009
                                    Date of Decision:10.06.2010
 
Mr.Kapil Dev son of Sh.Parkash Chand r/o H.No.359, Ground Floor, Sector 44-A, Chandigarh.
                                                                                    ---Complainant
V E R S U S
1.         Salora International Limited, SCO No.206-207, 2nd Floor, Sector 34-A Chandigarh through its Manager.
            2nd Address: SCO 327-328, Sector 40-d, Chandigarh through its Manager.
3.         Standard Teletronics, Show Room No.1049, Sector 22-B, Chandigarh.
---Opposite Parties
QUORUM                
                                    SHRI LAKSHMAN SHARMA                  PRESIDENT
                                    SHRI ASHOK RAJ BHANDARI MEMBER
 
PRESENT:                Sh.Sanjay Kumar, Advocate for complainant.
OPs exparte.
PER LAKSHMAN SHARMA, PRESIDENT
                        Mr.Kapil Dev has filed this complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 praying therein that OPs be directed to :-
i)                   Pay the price of the mobile set along with interest.
ii)                Pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- as compensation for mental agony and harassment.
iii)              Pay litigation expenses. 
2.                     In brief, the case of the complainant is that he purchased a second hand mobile set from Sh.Manvir Singh who had purchased the new set for Rs.20,200/- from OP-2 on 11.09.2008.  The mobile set in question is covered under warranty of one year. According to the complainant, the mobile set was having hanging problem due to which it was not working properly. Therefore, he lodged the complaint bearing No.SESO8CHD24460 on 24.12.2008 with OP-1. On 24.12.2008, the complainant handed over the mobile set to OP-1 vide job sheet (Annex.C-2). According to the complainant, OPs failed to repair the problem of hanging in the mobile set and to return its price since 24.12.08 which amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of OPs. Thereafter, the complainant served a legal notice upon the OPs but the same was received back with the report “left without address”. In these circumstances, the present complaint was filed seeking the reliefs mentioned above.
3.                     OPs were duly served but nobody appeared on their behalf either in person or through counsel. Therefore, they were ordered to be proceeded against exparte vide order dated 06.07.2009.
4.                     We have heard the learned counsel for the complainant and have gone through the entire record including documents, annexures, affidavits etc. 
5.                     Annexure C-1 is the copy of the bill whereby the mobile set in question was purchased by Sh.Manvir Singh for a sum of Rs.20,200/-. The copy of the job card dated 24.12.2008 has also been placed on record. From this document, it is apparent that the handset in question was having hanging problem. The complainant in his affidavit deposed that he had purchased the handset from Sh.Manvir Singh but since the day of its purchase, it is giving problem. He sent the mobile set for repairs to OP-1 but the same was neither repaired nor returned to the complainant despite his repeated requests. OPs have failed to repair the handset and to return the same after its repairs to the complainant. Thus, there is deficiency in service on the part of OPs.
5.                     In view of the above findings, this complaint is allowed with a direction to OPs to refund Rs.20,200/- to the complainant being the price of the handset in question. OPs are also directed to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs.5000/- as compensation for mental agony and harassment besides Rs.2500/- as costs of litigations.
6.                     This order be complied with by OPs within one month from the date of receipt of its certified copy, failing which OPs shall be liable to pay Rs.25,200/- to the complainant along with penal interest @ 18% p.a. from date of filing of the complaint i.e. 11.05.2009 till its realization besides costs of litigation.
7.                     Certified copy of this order be communicated to the parties, free of charge. After compliance file be consigned to record room.
Announced                                                                                         sd/-
10.06.2010                                                                     (LAKSHMAN SHARMA)
PRESIDENT
cm
sd/-
 (ASHOK RAJ BHANDARI)
MEMBER
 
C.C.No.669 of   2009
PRESENT:    None.
                                                                        ---
 
                        Arguments heard in the forenoon session. As per separate detailed order of even date, this complaint is allowed. After compliance file be consigned.
 
 
Announced.
10.06.2010                            Member                                 President   

MR. A.R BHANDARI, MEMBERHONABLE MR. LAKSHMAN SHARMA, PRESIDENT MRS. MADHU MUTNEJA, MEMBER