Post covers Phone Repair Complaint Chandigarh Panchkula Mohali. HDFC Ergo Consumer Complaint For Phone Repair 


In this post we’ll read about redressal provided by The South Mumbai District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum directed Samsung India Electronics Ltd and its authorized service centre SAP Mobile to pay Rs 15000 for refusing to repair mobile phone.

Also Read- Consumer forum directs insurance service provider to pay ₹1.97 lakh compensation

HDFC Ergo Consumer Complaint For Phone Repair
HDFC Ergo Consumer Complaint For Phone Repair

Background Facts

  1. On June 20, 2010, Ahirrao purchased a cellphone, Samsung’s 3310-Metro, from a mobile shop in Thakurdwar for Rs 4,800. It had a warranty of one year from the date of purchase and was sold to him with an assurance that in the event of any defects, it would be replaced or repaired within two days.
  2. Ahirrao alleged that four months later, the cellphone repeatedly froze, it would get automatically switched off and there was a persistent hardware problem. In September, he asked SAP Mobile to repair the phone.
  3. Two months later, he was told due to unavailability of some parts and hardware, it was not possible to repair the phone and was assured a new mobile from Samsung. Later, Ahirrao was told that the amount paid for the phone would be refunded.
  4. In July 2011, the dealer gave him a cheque in the name of Umesh Sonar. He explained to the dealer that his name is Umesh Ahirrao, but the dealer did not give him a corrected cheque.
  5. Ahirrao filed a complaint in April 2012, alleging that the handset caused him mental agony and physical harassment. Notices were served to the opposite parties, but they did not appear before the forum. The matter was heard ex parte.

Also Read- Not repairing damaged mobile costs company dear

Forum’s Observation and Order

The forum observed that according to the terms mentioned in the receipt issued to Ahirrao, it is the dealer’s liability to take care of defective mobiles under warranty and in this case the dealer had withdrawn from the liability.

It was the responsibility of opposite party no. 1 (dealer) to repair the mobile and give it to the complainant defect-free. From the papers and averments of the complainant in the affidavit, it is clear the dealer failed to comply with his liability and had not taken care of the mobile. Thus, it is liable for deficiency in service.

The forum held that the manufacturer is also liable for the defective mobile.

The South Mumbai District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum directed Samsung India Electronics Ltdand its authorized service centre SAP Mobile to pay Rs 3,000 compensation to a Byculla resident, whose phone bought in 2010 turned out to be defective.

The forum also directed the firm replace the instrument with one of the same model to to hand over a new phone of the same model to the complainant, and if the model was unavailable, the cost of the phone-Rs 4,800-be refunded.

Also Read- EMI scheme: HDFC Bank ordered to pay Rs 35,000 compensation to customer

For case specific advice please contact consumer forum advocates lawyers in Chandigarh Panchkula Mohali Kharar Zirakpur Derabassi .

More on 99888-17966.