NEENA AGGARWAL Vs. BASE 39 MOBILE COMMUNICATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present Revision Petition under section 21(b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short "the Act") has been filed challenging the order dated 16.08.2018 of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Haryana, Panchkula (for short "the State Commission") in Appeal No.537 of 2016 of the Petitioner against the order dated 27.05.2016 of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Ambala (for short "the District Forum") dismissing the Complaint No.75 of 2015 of the Petitioner.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that the Petitioner had purchased Apple 4S Mobile on 05.01.2015 for a sum of 20,000/-. She found that the phone was heating up and on telephonic call by her to Opposite Party No.1, she was advised to visit the authorised service centre. She went to authorised centre, i.e. Opposite Party No.2 on 08.01.2015 where her phone was examined by the engineer and service report no.10268 dated 08.01.2015 was issued whereby she was advised that the phone was getting heated up because she was using the old software programme and was advised to download the latest software. Dissatisfied she called at Apple Technical Support to resolve the problem but she was advised to visit Opposite Party No.2 again. On 18.02.2015, she visited Opposite Party No.2 and deposited her phone with the Opposite Party No.2 which was returned to her on 21.02.2015 vide service report no.11983. The issue with phone was same that is that it was heating up. She was again advised to upgrade the software which she refused. She then filed the Complaint before the District Forum claiming replacement of the said phone with a new one along with other benefits.

(3.) Parties led their evidence before the District Forum. The District Forum after perusing the material on record dismissed the Complaint holding as under: