Kerala

Ernakulam

CC/14/726

LIBY ABRAHAM - Complainant(s)

Versus

SAMSUNG INDIA ELECTRONICS PVT. LTD. - Opp.Party(s)

06 Dec 2014

ORDER

BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
ERNAKULAM
 
Complaint Case No. CC/14/726
 
1. LIBY ABRAHAM
MOOZHIYIL (H), PALA. P.O., PALA 686 575
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. SAMSUNG INDIA ELECTRONICS PVT. LTD.
REP. BY ITS M.D., A 25, GROUND FLOOR, FRONT TOWER, MOHAN CO-OPERATIVER INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, NEW DELHI - 100 044.
2. AREA MANAGER, SAMSUNG INDIA ELECTRONICS PVT. LTD.
ARYABHANGI PINACKAL, OPP. VARSHA APARTMENTS, ELAMKULAM, KADAVANTHRA.
3. PROPRIETOR, ALIEF MOBILE
PENTA MENAKA, SHOP NO. B1, SHANMUGHAM ROAD, ERNAKULAM.
4. PROPRIETOR, SAMSUNG SERVICE CENTRE,
PALA, KATTAKKAYAM ROAD, NEAR SULABHA SUPER MARKET, PALA - 686 575
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. A.RAJESH PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MR. SHEEN JOSE MEMBER
 
For the Complainant:
For the Opp. Party:
ORDER

BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,

ERNAKULAM.

 

Date of filing : 26/09/2014

Date of Order : 06/12/2014

 

Present :-

Shri. A. Rajesh, President.

Shri. Sheen Jose, Member.

Smt. V.K. Beena Kumari, Member.

 

C.C. No. 726/2014

Between

     

    Liby Abraham,

    ::

    Complainant

    Moozhiyil (H), Pala. P.O.,

    Pala – 686 575.

     

    (Party-in-person)

     

    And

     

    1. Samsung India Electronics

    Pvt. Ltd.,

    ::

    Opposite Parties

    Rep. by its M.D., A 25 Ground

    Floor, Front Tower, Mohan

    Co-oeprative Industrial Estate,

    New Delhi – 100 044.

     

    2. Area Manager, Samsung India

    Electronics Pvt. Ltd.,

    Aryabhangi, Pinackal,

    Opp. Varsha Apartments,

    Elamkulam, Kadavanthra.

     

    3. Proprietor, Alif Mobile,

    Penta Menaka, Shop No. B1,

    Shanmugham Road, Ernakulam.

     

    4. Proprietor, Samsung Service

    Centre, Pala, Kattakkayam

    Road, Near Sulabha Super

    Market, Pala – 686 575.

     

    (Op.pts. absent)

     

     

     

    O R D E R

    Sheen Jose, Member.

     

     

    1. This complaint is filed by the complainant alleging manufacturing defect in the mobile handset purchased by the complainant from the 3rd opposite party, which was manufactured by the 1st opposite party.

     

    2. Despite service of notice from this Forum, the opposite parties 1 to 3 did not respond to the same for reasons of their own. The notice of the 4th opposite party has not been completed. No oral evidence was adduced by the complainant. Exts. A1 and A2 were marked. Heard the complainant who appeared in person.

     

    3. Ext. A1 retail invoice goes to show that the complainant purchased a mobile handset from the 3rd opposite party at a price of Rs. 49,900/-, which was manufactured by the 1st opposite party. According to the complainant, he had to approach the 4th opposite party on three occasions to get the handset repaired. He maintains that in addition to the above repairs, he approached the 3rd opposite party to get the defects repaired. During the proceedings, the complainant submitted that finally he entrusted the mobile phone with the 4th opposite party on 09-09-2014 evident from Ext. A2 service report and till date they could not repair and return the same to the complainant.

     

    4. We are of the considered opinion that the recurring defect of the mobile handset is only due to its manufacturing defect. In that case, the complainant is entitled to get replacement of the handset with a new one according to the choice of the complainant. The above direction is enough to console the grievances of the complainant, so we refrain from awarding compensation and costs of the proceedings.

     

    5. In the result, we partly allow the complaint and directs that the opposite parties 1 to 3 shall replace the mobile handset of the complainant with a new one according to the choice of the complainant with fresh warranty. The difference in price shall be met by either. It is made clear that the opposite parties 1 to 3 are at liberty to collect the disputed mobile handset from the 4th opposite party.

     

    The order shall be complied with, within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

     

    Pronounced in the open Forum on this the 6th day of December 2014.

     

    Sd/- Sheen Jose, Member.

    Sd/- A. Rajesh, President.

    Sd/- V.K. Beena Kumari, Member.

     

    Forwarded/By Order,

     

     

     

     

    Senior Superintendent.

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    A P P E N D I X

     

    Complainant's Exhibits :-

     

    Exhibit A1

    ::

    Copy of the retail invoice

    dt. 28-02-2014

    “ A2

    ::

    Copy of the service request

    dt. 09-09-2014

     

    Opposite party's Exhibits :: Nil

     

    Depositions

    ::

    Nil

     

    =========

     

     
     
    [HON'BLE MR. A.RAJESH]
    PRESIDENT
     
    [HON'BLE MR. SHEEN JOSE]
    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.