SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

NISHA GUPTA, KAILASH SOYAL
MANISH GUPTA – Appellant
Versus
CANON IMAGE SQUARE – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Mr. Yatindra Prakash Sharma, Advocate, for the Complainant; Mr. Shailendra Chhabra, Advocate, for Non-Applicant No. 3

ORDER

Mrs. Justice Nisha Gupta, President—This complaint has been filed by the complainant with the contention that he purchased a Canon Digital ALR camera no. EOS-ID X-21118017000476 for an amount of Rs. 4,17,095/-. Along with the camera four lenses were also given to him for the use. The camera was having two years warranty but after some time it was found that pictures clicked from the camera started giving lines. The complaint was communicated to the non-applicant and they stated that camera has to be sent to Delhi service station. Thereafter they demanded Rs. 90,000/- as repair charges whereas the camera was in warranty period. Due to the defect of camera the complainant has to cancel booking of 4-5 marriages and other programmes in January. He has to suffer mental agony and loss. Ultimately the non-applicants were not ready to repair the camera without repair charges and the complainant has to deposit Rs. 60492/- as repair charges. Thereafter camera has been handed over to him. Hence,non-applicants are guilty of deficiency in service and Rs. 60492/- be refunded to him along with the cost of camera and lenses and compensation for mental agony,financial loss and expenditure be a

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top