- Joined
- 3 Nov 2010
- Messages
- 26,677
- Solutions
- 7
- Reaction score
- 35,904
PUNE: The district consumer court has directed leading mobile phone manufacturer Samsung India and its authorized service center to jointly and severally refund Rs 37,500 along with Rs 5,000 fine to a buyer for selling defective handset and failing to repair the same during warranty period.
Vitthal Vishnu Talpade, a resident of Gokhale Nagar, had purchased a `Samsung Galaxy S5 G900H' brand mobile handset for Rs 37,500 on October 28, 2014. The company had issued a year-long warranty for the product.
In October 2015, Talpade started experiencing problems with the mobile handset as it would hang frequently and its screen too would flicker quite often. He deposited the defective handset with Mayuresh Cell Care, the company's authorised service center at J.M.Road on October 24, 2015 i.e. a few days before the warranty period was to lapse.
The service center updated the mobile software and returned the handset to Talpade claiming that it was repaired. However, the problem persisted even thereafter and some new problems emerged in the handset. When he took up the matter with the service center, Talpade was told that the motherboard of his mobile handset had damaged and would require replacement. He was asked to pay Rs 8,700 towards such replacement despite the handset being within the warranty period.
Talpade later contacted Samsung India office in Gurgaon, Haryana and even lodged a complaint with its all India helpline but, there was no response from the manufacturer. He later moved the consumer court alleging that by selling defective handset and not repairing the same, the company and its authorised service center had indulged in unfair trade practice and deficient service.
Both, Samsung India and its service center, failed to respond to the consumer court's notices by neither filing any written say nor being represented by any lawyer. The bench of consumer court president V P Utpat and member Kshitija Kulkarni ruled in favour of proceeding ex-parte against the two respondents.
Relying on the affidavit in evidence and supporting documents filed by the complainant and the fact that the claim remained uncontroverted by the respondents, the bench held that the company and its authorised center were jointly and severally liable for causing deficient service and must refund the handset price along with Rs 5,000 compensation. It also cited Supreme Court rulings interpreting Sections 3 and 14 of the Consumer Protection Act in relation to deficiencies remaining unattended by the service provider and the resultant liability.
Samsung India, service centre fined for defective device | ET Telecom
Vitthal Vishnu Talpade, a resident of Gokhale Nagar, had purchased a `Samsung Galaxy S5 G900H' brand mobile handset for Rs 37,500 on October 28, 2014. The company had issued a year-long warranty for the product.
In October 2015, Talpade started experiencing problems with the mobile handset as it would hang frequently and its screen too would flicker quite often. He deposited the defective handset with Mayuresh Cell Care, the company's authorised service center at J.M.Road on October 24, 2015 i.e. a few days before the warranty period was to lapse.
The service center updated the mobile software and returned the handset to Talpade claiming that it was repaired. However, the problem persisted even thereafter and some new problems emerged in the handset. When he took up the matter with the service center, Talpade was told that the motherboard of his mobile handset had damaged and would require replacement. He was asked to pay Rs 8,700 towards such replacement despite the handset being within the warranty period.
Talpade later contacted Samsung India office in Gurgaon, Haryana and even lodged a complaint with its all India helpline but, there was no response from the manufacturer. He later moved the consumer court alleging that by selling defective handset and not repairing the same, the company and its authorised service center had indulged in unfair trade practice and deficient service.
Both, Samsung India and its service center, failed to respond to the consumer court's notices by neither filing any written say nor being represented by any lawyer. The bench of consumer court president V P Utpat and member Kshitija Kulkarni ruled in favour of proceeding ex-parte against the two respondents.
Relying on the affidavit in evidence and supporting documents filed by the complainant and the fact that the claim remained uncontroverted by the respondents, the bench held that the company and its authorised center were jointly and severally liable for causing deficient service and must refund the handset price along with Rs 5,000 compensation. It also cited Supreme Court rulings interpreting Sections 3 and 14 of the Consumer Protection Act in relation to deficiencies remaining unattended by the service provider and the resultant liability.
Samsung India, service centre fined for defective device | ET Telecom
