AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
5 paragraphs · 415 words-FEELING dissatisfied with the amount of compensation of Rs. 2,000 and Rs. 1,000 as cost of litigation awarded by the District Forum vide impugned order dated 27. 9. 2007, for having suffered deficiency in service on the part of the respondents in not rectifying the defects of the mobile telephone, the appellant has preferred this appeal.
WE have perused the impugned order and find no infirmity either in the finding of facts returned by the District Forum or quantum of compensation. Appellant purchased a mobile telephone for Rs. 3,900. According to him it started giving problem and he gave the set to the respondent No. 3 vide job card dated 14. 6. 2007. When he visited the respondent he refused to hand over the set saying that this was not within the warranty period and he has to pay the repair charges. Consequently he filed the instant complaint before District Forum. District Forum accepted the version of the appellant that the defect appeared during the warranty period and, therefore, held the respondent guilty for deficiency in service and directed it to refund the repaired set without charge and also to pay compensation and cost of litigation.
When the District Forum holds the service provider guilty for deficiency in service it shall order for doing one or more of the following things as prescribed under Section 14 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 : (a) to remove the defect pointed out by the appropriate laboratory from the goods in question; (b) to replace the goods with new goods of similar description which shall be free from any defect; (c) to return to the complainant the price, or as the case may be, the charges paid by the complainant; (d) to pay such amount as may be awarded by it as compensation to the consumer for any loss or injury suffered by the consumer, due to the negligence of the opposite party.
IN our view the discretion exercised by the District Forum in this case does not call for any interference and as such the appeal is dismissed in limine. The payment shall be made within one month from the date of receipt of this order. Bank Guarantee/fdr, if any, furnished by the appellant be returned forthwith.
A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties free of charge and also to the concerned District Forum and thereafter the file be consigned to Record Room. Appeal dismissed.