Haryana

Panipat

CC/21/308

Anita Rani - Complainant(s)

Versus

Samsung India Electronics Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Sh. Sahab Singh Chauhan

08 Jun 2023

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
PANIPAT
 
Complaint Case No. CC/21/308
( Date of Filing : 28 Dec 2021 )
 
1. Anita Rani
Aged about 40 years W/o Sh. Rajender Kumar R/o H. No. 771/12, Chandni Bagh, Sanoli Road, Panipat Aadhar No. 8486687121148.
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. Samsung India Electronics Ltd.
Having its registered officwo, Te at 20th to 24th floor, Two Horizon Centre Golf Course Road, DLF, Phase-5, Sector-43, Gurgaon (Haryana)-122202 through its Director/ authorized signatory.
2. Aggarwal Trading Company
Having its office at Gupta Colony, Gohana Road, Panipat through its Prop./ authorized signatory.
3. Star Services Centre
Having its head office at Kishor, Tehsil Camp, Near PNB Bank, Panipat (132103) through its Prop./authorized signatory.
4. Garg Power Solution
Shop No. 407, Chandni Bagh, Sanoli Road, Panipat through its Prop./authorized signatory.
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
  Dr. J.R. Chauhan PRESIDENT
  Smt. Anita Dahiya MEMBER
 
PRESENT:
Shri Sahab Singh Chauhan, Advocate for complainant.
......for the Complainant
 
Shri Sunil Kumar wadhwa, Advocate for respondent/opposite party No.1.
Respondent/opposite parties No.2 to 4 ex parte vide order dated 04.03.2022.
......for the Opp. Party
Dated : 08 Jun 2023
Final Order / Judgement

No evidence of complainant is present despite last opportunity. This case is continuing for evidence of the complainant from 01.06.2022 and today is last opportunity on payment of costs Rs.500/-. Even cost has not been paid by the complainant and no effort has been made by the complainant to produce the evidence. Moreso, the complainant has already availed more than six effective opportunities including last opportunity. Hence, there are no sufficient grounds for adjourning this case for the purpose of the evidence of the complainant. Hence, the evidence of the complainant is hereby closed by order of this Commission.

 2.               This complaint has been filed against the respondents seeking compensation of Rs.50,000/- as  the complainant has suffered due to fault in LED TV.  In written statement, respondent No.1 submitted that it was told by the engineer of the company that the fault is due to moisture in the unit and the repair of the unit shall be on chargeable basis but instead of get repaired the complainant filed the present complaint. The respondent No.1 denied other allegation of the complaint. None appeared on behalf of respondents No.2 to 4, hence respondents No.2 to 4 proceeded against ex parte vide order dated 08.06.2023.

3.                As the complainant has come before this Commission for seeking relief, the onus was on the complainant to prove her case by adducing cogent and convincing evidence. Since the complainant has not produced any evidence on record despite several effective opportunities as stated above and hence, there is no iota of evidence on record to substantiate the allegations of the complaint. Hence, the present complaint is hereby dismissed in lacking of evidence.

4.                This order be communicated to the parties free of costs and file be consigned to the records after due compliance. 

 
 
[ Dr. J.R. Chauhan]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[ Smt. Anita Dahiya]
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.