Mobile shop owner asked to replace handset or pay Rs 56,900 for defective merchandise

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum has asked a mobile shop owner to pay a compensation of Rs 5,000 for selling a defective handset.

By: Express News Service | Panchkula | Published:June 18, 2017 4:43 am
At the time of purchase, Samsung had offered an insurance scheme for breakage, theft and any kind of loss or damage of the handset for Rs 2,399. (Representational Picture)

THE DISTRICT Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum has asked a mobile shop owner to pay a compensation of Rs 5,000 for selling a defective handset. Passing the order on Friday, the forum also directed Panchkula-based shop owner Mobile Music and Syska Gadget Secure Insurance Company Ltd to either replace the handset or refund the Rs 56,900 spent by complainant Vinod Kumar Bansal. Bansal stated in the complaint that he had bought a mobile handset, Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge, from a cellphone shop in Panchkula in August 2016.

At the time of purchase, Samsung had offered an insurance scheme for breakage, theft and any kind of loss or damage of the handset for Rs 2,399. The scheme was valid for one year. A few days after buying the handset, it stopped functioning properly. On December 28, 2016, Bansal contacted the shop owner to repair the handset. After repairing the handset, it was returned to the complainant, but it stopped working the same day. Bansal then requested for replacement of the damaged set to the company or a refund and filed a case in the consumer courts on February 20, this year.

The forum issued summons to the shop owner but no one deposed on behalf of the company. Hence, ex-parte proceedings were initiated. Pronouncing the orders, the forum said, “The handset was handed over to Syska Gadget Secure Insurance Company Limited for necessary repair within warranty period but instead of repairing the same, the company was keeping it in its possession till date and did not appear during the proceedings of the case. It certainly shows the carelessness of the company for non-repairing the handset within the warranty period. The non-appearance proves deficiency on their part in providing service to the complainant.”

For all the latest Cities News, download Indian Express App

  1. No Comments.