DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BHIWANI.

   CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO.336 of 15

                                           DATE OF INSTITUTION: - 11-12.2015

                                                     DATE OF ORDER: 30-05-2016

Naresh Kumar son of Shri Gorak Ram, resident of Maman Panna, House No. 34/39, Ward No. 16, near Bachan Singh Raju Ata Chaki, Bhiwani, Tehsil & District Bhiwani.

            ……………Complainant.

VERSUS                

1. Unicom System, Sony Mobile Service Centre, City Mall, near Adrash Women College, Hansi Gate, Bhiwani.

1. Sony India Electronics Pvt. Ltd., A-31, Moha Cooperative Industrial Estate, Mathura Road, New Delhi-110044.

………….. Opposite Parties.

COMPLAINT U/S 12 & 13 OF CONSUMER PROECTION ACT

BEFORE: -    Shri Rajesh Jindal, President.

 Smt. Ansuya Bishnoi, Member.

Present:-    Suraj authorized representative of complainant.

       Sh. Sukhpal Singh, Advocate for Ops.

ORDER:-

Rajesh Jindal, President:

          In brief, the grievance of the complainant is that on 22.06.2015 he had purchased one hand set of Sony Xperia-GR for a sum of Rs. 15,990/- from OP.  It is alleged that after the purchase of mobile handset it became defective.  The complainant visited to the service centre of respondent company several times and requested to repair the same but to no avail. Hence the complainant was deprived of use of the Hand Set and suffered a loss. Now the complainant has claimed the compensation and costs by way of filing present complaint.

2.                 On appearance, the OPs filed written statement alleging therein that the Ops have provided free of cost of services to the complainant when the complainant has approached the Ops.  It is submitted that the Ops vide letter 30.01.2016 have requested the complainant to get the handset inspected with the Ops however complainant have failed to do so.  It is submitted that the OP no. 2 provides a warranty of one year on its products from the time of its original purchase and the liability strictly lies in accordance with the terms and conditions of the warranty provided by it and the Ops cannot be held liable for the claims falling outside the scope of the warranty.  Hence, in view of the facts and circumstances mentioned above, there is no deficiency in service on the part of OPs and complaint of the complainant is liable to be dismissed with costs

3.                 In order to make out his case, the complainant has tendered into evidence Annexure C-1 to Annexure C-4 & Annexure A to Annexure C alongwith supporting affidavit.

4.                 In reply thereto, the counsel for OPs has tendered into evidence documents Annexure R1 to Annexure R3 alongwith supporting affidavit. 

5.                 We have gone through the record of the case carefully and have heard the authorized representative of complainant  and counsel for the OPs.

6.                 The authorized representative of the complainant reiterated the contents of the complaint.  He submitted that the letter dated 30.01.2016 was actually dispatched by the OP no. 2 by registered post on 01.03.2016 and referred the envelop of the letter bearing the counter file of receipt.  He submitted that the OP no. 2 has intentionally back-dated the letter to take undue advantage.

7.                The counsel for the Ops reiterated the contents of the reply.  He submitted that the complaint of the complainant is false and frivolous.  He submitted that the complainant is habitual litigant and making false complaints against the mobile companies and he cannot be allowed to abuse the process of law.  He submitted that the handset in question has not manufacturing defect.  He submitted that on 28.09.2015 the software of the handset of the complainant was upgraded and it is working perfectly.

8.                 Considering the pleadings and arguments of the parties, we partly allow the complaint of the complainant and direct the Ops to rectify the defects of the mobile handset by replacing the defective parts and put it in working condition and also to pay Rs. 1500/- as litigation cost to the complainant.  This order be complied with by the Ops within 30 days from the date of passing this order and complainant is directed to approach the Ops alongwith handset to get it repaired within 7 days from the date of passing of this order.  Certified copies of the order be sent to the parties free of costs.  File be consigned to the record room, after due compliance.

Announced in open Forum.

Dated:.30-05-2016.                                                                (Rajesh Jindal)

                                                                                       President,        

                                                                           District Consumer Disputes

                                                                           Redressal Forum, Bhiwani.

                    (Ansuya Bishnoi),

                          Member