RAKESH SINGHLA Vs. AIRPHONE COMMUNICATIONS INDIA LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal under Sec.15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') is directed against order dated 10.9.1998 passed by South District Forum (Janakpuri District Forum) in Complaint Case No.1458/1997, entitled Rakesh Singhla V/s. M/s. Airphone Communications India Ltd. and Ors. , whereby complaint filed by the appellant was dismissed.

(2.) Appellant had filed a complaint under Sec.12 of the Act before the District Forum averring therein that he had purchased one Cellular phone 'seimens S4 IEMI No.4451' from Airphone Communications (I) Ltd. (respondent No.1) who are authorised dealer of respondent No.2 - M/s. Seimens Telecom Ltd. It was alleged that the battery of the said phone became unserviceable/unchargable within 4-5 days from the date of the purchase. He approached the respondent but they failed to give any satisfactory reply. He claimed compensation amounting to Rs.20,000/- for the business loss, Rs.6,000/- towards price of the battery and other expenses and Rs.5,000/- as legal costs. Respondents in their reply/written version pleaded that the warranty, as on the date of purchase i. e.4.3.1997 did not cover chargable battery and, therefore, free cost of replacement of the battery was not possible.

(3.) After hearing the parties and on perusal of the material placed on record, the learned District Forum observed that Cellular phone was supplied to the appellant under a warranty and in condition No.2 of the warranty card, it was mentioned that warranty was not valid for chargable battery. In other words, seller had expressly given in writing to the appellant that chargable battery would not be replaced and accordingly finding no force in the complaint, the same was dismissed.