BlackBerry, dealer penalised for deficiency in services | chandigarh | Hindustan Times
Today in New Delhi, India
Mar 28, 2017-Tuesday
New Delhi
  • Humidity
  • Wind

BlackBerry, dealer penalised for deficiency in services

chandigarh Updated: Mar 22, 2014 11:33 IST
HT Correspondent

For failing to rectify a defect in a BlackBerry Torch 2 (9810) handset, the manufacturer, importer, authorised service centre and the dealer have been directed to refund Rs 27,190 (cost of the handset) along with Rs 7,500 as compensation towards deficient services to a Sector 19 resident.

“The evidence of the complainant has gone un-rebutted, which proves deficiency in service,” said the district consumer disputes redressal forum, Chandigarh, while disposing of the complaint by Harshwinder Singh Bhullar.

Bhullar had moved the forum alleging deficiency in services on part of manufacturer BlackBerry (earlier known as Research in Motion), importer of handsets Redington (India) Limited, BlackBerry authorised service centre HCL Infosystems Limited, and dealer Anmol Watches and Electronics Limited, Sector 22, Chandigarh.

Blackberry torch 9810

The BlackBerry handset, purchased in June 2012 developed a snag within a week and after repeated follow-ups, it was replaced being under warranty. Bhullar alleged that even the replaced handset started giving problems.

Due to re-occurrence of faults in the replaced handset, it was again deposited with BlackBerry’s authorised service centre. On August 14, 2013, he was handed over another handset, which crashed the next day.

Redington (India) Limited, in its reply, submitted that it being neither the seller nor service provider nor manufacturer, had no privity of contract with the complainant. The importer said that it just procures the handset from the manufacturer and distributes the same in the market to its retailers for further sale.

BlackBerry, HCL Infosystems Limited- authorised service center of BlackBerry, and dealer Anmol Watches and Electronics (P) Ltd, Sector 22, Chandigarh, were proceeded ex-parte.

The consumer forum held, “Bhullar is right in not accepting the repaired handset, rather praying for the refund of the amount paid towards its cost as he was deprived of its usage in spite of spending such a handsome amount on it. So many repairs and promises of replacement show that the handset had inherent/manufacturing defect, which could not be rectified despite many services.”

“Bhullar’s demand for the refund of the price value is due to the manufacturing defect in the handset and poor service and poor product quality. Therefore, he is no more interested in continuing with BlackBerry,” observed the consumer forum.