Punjab

Bhatinda

EA/10/49

Gurvinder Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Mr. Ashok Kabdia, Prop./Partner - Opp.Party(s)

Narinder Kumar, Adv.

12 Nov 2010

ORDER


DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,BATHINDA (PUNJAB)DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,Govt.House No.16-D,Civil station,Near SSP Residence,BATHINDA-151001.
Execution Application No. EA/10/49
1. Gurvinder Singhalias Goldy son of Sh.Jagjeet Singh, R/o Q.No.F-1, Central JailBathindaPunjab ...........Appellant(s)

Versus.
1. Mr. Ashok Kabdia, Prop./Partner Laki's Mobile Care, Near Gupta Sanitary Store, Amrik Singh Road,BathindaPunjab2. Amrinder SinghManager of Lali's Mobile Care, Near Gupta Sanitary Store, Amrik Singh Road,BhatindaPunjab3. M/s. Motorola India Pvt. Ltd.Motorola Excellence Centre, 415/2, Mahrauli Gurgaon Road, thorugh its MD/authorised signatoryGurgaonGurgaon ...........Respondent(s)



BEFORE:

PRESENT :Narinder Kumar, Adv., Advocate for Appellant

Dated : 12 Nov 2010
JUDGEMENT

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.

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BATHINDA

EA.No.49 of 06-09-2010

Decided on 12-11-2010


 

Gurwinder Singh alias Goldy son of Sh.Jagjeet Singh, resident of Q.No.F-1, Central Jail, Bathinda.

.......Complainant/Applicant

Versus


 

  1. Mr. Ashok Kabdia, Prop./Partner of Lali's Mobile Care, Near Gupta Sanitary Store, Amrik Singh

     Road, Bathinda.

     

  2. Amrinder Singh, Manager of Lali's Mobile Care, Near Gupta Sanitary Store, Amrik Singh Road,

    Bathinda.

     

  3. M/s Motorola India Pvt. Ltd., Motorola Excellence Centre, 415/2, Mahrauli Gurgaon Road, Gurgaon,

    through its Managing Director/authorized signatory.

     


 

......Opposite parties/Respondents


 

Application under Section 27 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.


 

QUORUM


 

Smt. Vikramjit Kaur Soni, President.

Dr. Phulinder Preet, Member.

Sh. Amarjeet Paul, Member.


 

Present:-

For the Complainant: Sh.Narinder Kumar, counsel for the complainant.

 


 

ORDER


 

VIKRAMJIT KAUR SONI, PRESIDENT:-


 

1. The present application has been filed by the complainant u/s 27 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (Here-in-after referred to as 'Act') for non-compliance of order dated 16.06.2010 passed by this Hon'ble Forum which is reproduced as under:-

“...........In view of the above discussion the opposite party Nos.2&3 are deficient in providing the services to the complainant. The opposite party Nos. 2&3 are directed to replace the mobile set in question Model V-8 which is lying with opposite parties till date with a new one with same specifications with fresh warranty or to refund the amount as per invoice in case the set of same model and specifications is not available with opposite parties and to pay Rs.3000/- as cost and compensation to the complainant for mental agony and harassment suffered by him within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.........”.

The opposite parties have given a cheque of Rs.15,500/- dated 30.09.2010 according to the order of this Hon'ble Forum under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The compliance has not been done within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of the order.

In the present case, a copy has been received by opposite parties on 30.06.2010 and the cheque has been sent after lapse of approximate two months.

2. The opposite parties has filed reply dated 04.11.2010 to this application wherein, the reasons of delay have been mentioned as below:-

“We have not received the court order on time due to address mentioned in summons dispatched to motorola India was not correct too, besides that a communication gap was born.

The person who was handling the court case had left the job and new appointed person has joined in late that was also one cause in delay for this case.

Apart of your regular reminders from your side, we part of redingtons India Ltd. and you been parts of redigton partners were helpless as no responsible person was there to whom we can contact and get the same issue resolved.”

3. Arguments heard on application and record perused.

4. The complainant has received a cheque dated 30.09.2010 for a sum of Rs.15.500/- vide cheque No.006037 deposited by Sh.Amrinder Singh, Manager of Lali's Care. The complainant had received this cheque under protest on 13.10.2010. Now, the case remains for delay of three months from the date of receipt of copy of the order. As the opposite parties have duly quoted the reasons for delay in their reply which shows that there was no malafide intention of delay on the part of opposite parties. Keeping in view, the allegation of the complainant, that he had received the amount after much delay. This Forum imposes fine of Rs.500/- on the opposite parties to be deposited in legal aid fund. The opposite parties have deposited this amount on 12.11.2010 vide receipt No.660. Hence, this application stands disposed off as dismissed as the compliance of order dated 16.06.2010 is complied with and fine is paid in legal aid fund for the delayed payment.

5. A copy of this order be sent to the parties concerned free of cost and file be consigned for record. '


 


 

Pronounced in open Forum (Vikramjit Kaur Soni)

12.11.2010 President

 


 

(Dr. Phulinder Preet)

Member


 


 

(Amarjeet Paul)

Member