BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, PONDICHERRY

C.C.No.32/2015

Dated this the 4^th day of January 2016

Senthemijan @ Senthamizhan, son of Pachayappan

No.11, Indira Nagar, Kirumampakkam and Post

Puducherry – 607 402.

                                                …. Complainant

Vs.

1.The Managing Director                        

   Lava International Limited      

   No.A-56, Sector 64, Noida

   Uttarpradesh – 201 301.

2. The Proprietor        

    Sastha Mobiles Land               

    Old No. 19,New No. 17, 18

    Goubert Bazaar, Anna Salai, Puducherry – 605 001.

3. The Manager   

   Lava Xolo Service         

   Guna Electronics                    

   No.245, Thiruvalluvar Salai,

   1^st Floor, Near Kumaran Gas Agencies

   Puducherry – 605 005.               

                   .... Opposite Parties

BEFORE:

          THIRU.A.ASOKAN, B.A., B.L.,

          PRESIDENT 

Tmt. PVR. DHANALAKSHMI, B.A.,B.L.,

           MEMBER

Thiru V.V. STEEPHEN, B.A., LL.B., 

           MEMBER

FOR THE COMPLAINANT            :  Thiru S. Calaivanane, Advocate

FOR THE OPPOSITE PARTIES:

OP.1  and OP.3     : Thiru S. Savariram, Advocate

                                                 OP.2       : Exparte.

O R  D  E  R

          This is a complaint filed u/s.14  of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 for;

1. Directing the opposite parties to replace the defective LAVA IRIS X1 mobile phone manufactured by the 1^st Opposite Party and sold by the 2^nd Opposite Party to the complainant on 19.11.2015 with a new LAVA IRIS X1 mobile or in the alternative to pay Rs.7,200/-, the cost of mobile, with 12% interest per annum from 19.11.2014;
2. Directing the opposite parties to pay a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh only) as compensation for the deficiency in service, unfair trade practice by the opposite parties;
3. Directing the opposite parties to pay a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh only) as compensation towards deficiency in service and unfair trade practice of Opposite Party No.3.
4. Directing the opposite parties to pay a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh only) towards compensation for the loss sustained by the complainant in his Advocate Profession due to loss of contact caused by the prolonged repair of the mobile;
5. Directing the opposite parties to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees ten thousand only) towards litigation expenses and cost of this complaint.

Today the complaint was called.  The complainant present.  Counsel was absent.  The Opposite Parties are also absent.  Counsel present.  The Counsel for the Complainant endorsed full satisfaction on the complaint and the Counsel for Opposite Parties 1 and 3 filed memo stating that the matter was amicable settled between the complainant and the Opposite Parties 1 and 3.  The complainant had accepted the amount of Rs.8000/- vide cheque No. 771875 of Indian Overseas Bank dated 15.12.2015 with full satisfaction and prayed to record the above factum in the interest of justice. 

In view of the endorsement made by the Counsel for the complainant on the complaint as well as the memo filed by the Counsel for the Opposite Parties 1 and 3, this complaint is hereby dismissed as not pressed. No cost.

Dated this the 4^th day of January 2016.

1.  ASOKAN)

PRESIDENT

(PVR. DHANALAKSHMI)

MEMBER

(V.V. STEEPHEN)

MEMBER