Maharashtra

Additional DCF, Mumbai(Suburban)

CC/17/78

ARUN BABAJI SAWANT - Complainant(s)

Versus

LENOVO PVT LTD - Opp.Party(s)

31 Aug 2017

ORDER

Addl. Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Mumbai Suburban District
Admin Bldg., 3rd floor, Nr. Chetana College, Bandra-East, Mumbai-51
 
Complaint Case No. CC/17/78
 
1. ARUN BABAJI SAWANT
1/12 SWAYAMBHU CHS SHIV KRUPA NAGAR NEAR KASHI VISHWANATH TEMPLE BHANDUP (E) MUMBAI 42
2. KRUTIKA ARUN SAWANT
1/12 SWAYAMBHU CHS SHIV KRUPA NAGAR NEAR KASHIVISHWANATH TEMPLE BHANDUP (E)400042
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. LENOVO PVT LTD
TECHNOTRONICS TECHNOLOGIES 204 RAJGOR EMPIRE OPP METRO GATE NO 4 NEAR SHOWROOM GHATKOPAR(W)MUMBAI
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. S.D.MADAKE PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MR. S.V.KALAL MEMBER
 
For the Complainant:
For the Opp. Party:
Dated : 31 Aug 2017
Final Order / Judgement

PRESENT

                   Complainant  by representative Miss.Krutika A.Sawant present.    

                   Oppoent No. 1 &  2  Ex-parte.                    

                                       ORDER

 

(Per- Mr. S. D. MADAKE, Hon’ble President)

  1.  The Complainant purchased a Motorola make mobile on 22.03.2017 for Rs. 15,999/- from Arun Sawant.
  2. According to Complainant on 13.04.2017 the battery of mobile is stopped charging and Complainant visited service centre of Lenovo for repairing on payment.
  3. The Complainant was told that mobile was liquid damaged and is not covered within warranty of company.
  4. The Complainant contacted Flipkart, however the issue was not settled on the ground that replacement is possible as per rules within 10 days only.
  5. The Complainant alleged that mobile did not work properly for one month, which shows that there was inherent manufacturing defect in the mobile.
  6. The Complainant alleged that he was subjected to mental agony due to defective mobile and deficiency in service.
  7. The Complainant prayed for direction to Opponents to pay Rs. 15,999/- with interest as well as compensation of Rs. 50,000/- and cost Rs. 25,000/-.
  8. The Complaint was admitted on 29.06.2017. The notice was duly served on both parties. Both parties remained absent and did not file written statement.
  9. The Forum passed order to proceed Ex-parte. The Complainant filed Pursis that Complaint and all documents filed on record be treated as affidavit of evidence as well as written argument.
  10. We have heard Complainant. Perused record. The mobile is manufactured by Opponent. The mobile was purchased through online facility.
  11. The documents show that daughter of the Complainant was not able to use the said mobile even for a month due to defects. The Opposite Parties were liable to refund the amount. We hold both Opponents jointly and severally are liable to pay Rs. 15,000/- (Fifteen Thousand).

12.     We pass the following order.    

                                                ORDER

1.       Complaint Case No. 78/2017 is partly allowed.

2.       The Opposite Party No. 1 and 2 are directed to pay Rs. 15,000/- with interest at 9% p.a. to Complainant from date of order.

3.       No order as to compensation and cost.

4.       Copy of  the order be sent to both parties free of cost.

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. S.D.MADAKE]
PRESIDENT
 
[HON'BLE MR. S.V.KALAL]
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.