Latest news with #Croma
Time of India
2 days ago
- Business
- Time of India
Consumer panel asks Apple, Croma to refund customer's iPhone cost over microphone defect
Mumbai: A consumer commission here has directed Apple India and Croma to refund an iPhone cost of ₹65,264 to the legal heirs of a customer for failing to resolve a microphone defect in the device, holding the two companies deficient in service. Both the manufacturer and the seller are "jointly and severally liable for the defective product", the commission said in the order passed earlier this month, as the two companies failed to resolve the defect in the device purchased by the customer (now deceased). The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Mumbai (Suburban) held that the "manufacturer (Apple) merely mentioning certain unauthorized modification or damage in hardware cannot be the correct resolution" for the customer's grievance. It further ruled that the seller (Croma) too cannot escape liability merely by stating the "defect is attributable to the manufacturer". "Once the product was sold through their outlet, they assumed responsibility for ensuring that the product was free from defects and serviceable," the commission noted. It said the "principle of vicarious liability squarely applies", as the seller stands in a position of trust and derives commercial benefit from the sale. The complainant purchased an iPhone 11 for ₹65,264 from a Croma store in Mumbai on June 4, 2021. Shortly after the purchase, the device developed an issue as the speakerphone function was not working during calls, with specifically "no speech from mic". The complainant approached Apple's authorised service centre, but repairs were denied on the grounds of "unauthorized modifications in the device," rendering it ineligible for warranty service. Despite repeated complaints and emails, the opposite parties failed to address the grievance, following which the complainant approached the commission. During the course of proceeding, the customer passed away, but the complaint was continued by his legal heirs. The Apple India Private Limited, in its response, admitted the purchase and the issue with the microphone. But it reiterated that the device had unauthorised modifications, voiding the warranty. Infiniti Retail Limited (Croma) failed to appear and was proceeded against ex-parte. The commission, after perusal of documents on record, held that Apple failed to specify exactly which term or condition of the warranty was breached by the complainant. "Merely referring clauses of warranty terms and condition cannot be sufficient to attribute the particular defect as certain unauthorized modification or damage to software," it noted. The commission concluded that documents and evidence brought on record are sufficient to ascertain the defect in goods coupled with deficiency in service provided by the opposite parties. It ruled that both the manufacturer and the seller are "jointly and severally liable for the defective product". The commission directed both the opposite parties to refund the iPhone cost of ₹65,264, along with a 6 per cent interest per annum from the date of the complaint (August 6, 2021) until the date of actual payment. The two companies were also directed to pay ₹15,000 as compensation for mental agony and ₹2,000 for legal expenses to customer's family.
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
2 days ago
- Business
- Business Standard
Apple, Croma asked by consumer panel to refund customer's iPhone cost
A consumer panel in Mumbai asked Apple India and Croma to refund the cost of an iPhone to a customer for not being able to fix a microphone defect. According to a PTI report, earlier this month, the panel said both the manufacturer and seller are jointly liable for the defective product and should refund ₹65,264 to the customer - who is now deceased. 'Both manufacturer and seller jointly liable' Mumbai's District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission ruled that the manufacturer (Apple) mentioning 'unauthorised modifications' is not a resolution to a customer's grievance. It further said that even the seller (Croma) cannot evade responsibility by simply blaming the manufacturer for the defect. The panel reportedly said it was the duty of both the seller and manufacturer to ensure the credibility of the product that was sold through them. It said the "principle of vicarious liability squarely applies", as the seller stands in a position of trust and derives commercial benefit from the sale. Grievance was not addressed On approaching Apple, the complainant was denied repairs as the company said that 'unauthorised modifications' were made on the device. Despite various attempts, neither party addressed the grievance. According to the PTI report, the complainant died while the proceedings were still ongoing. The complaint was continued by his legal heirs. Clearing stance Apple India later admitted to the issue with the microphone but reiterated that the device had unauthorised modifications because of which warranty was denied. Croma, on the other hand, failed to appear for the proceedings. The panel concluded that both the manufacturer and the seller are "jointly and severally liable for the defective product". According to the PTI report, the commission asked both the opposite parties to refund the cost of the iPhone, along with a 6 per cent interest per annum from the date of the complaint until the date of actual payment. The companies also have to pay ₹15,000 as compensation for mental agony and ₹2,000 for legal expenses.
NDTV
2 days ago
- Business
- NDTV
Apple, Croma Asked To Refund Customer's i-Phone Cost Over Microphone Defect
Mumbai: A consumer commission here has directed Apple India and Croma to refund an i-Phone cost of Rs 65,264 to the legal heirs of a customer for failing to resolve a microphone defect in the device, holding the two companies deficient in service. Both the manufacturer and the seller are "jointly and severally liable for the defective product", the commission said in the order passed earlier this month, as the two companies failed to resolve the defect in the device purchased by the customer (now dead). The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Mumbai (Suburban) held that the "manufacturer (Apple) merely mentioning certain unauthorized modification or damage in hardware cannot be the correct resolution" for the customer's grievance. It further ruled that the seller (Croma) too cannot escape liability merely by stating the "defect is attributable to the manufacturer". "Once the product was sold through their outlet, they assumed responsibility for ensuring that the product was free from defects and serviceable," the commission noted. It said the "principle of vicarious liability squarely applies", as the seller stands in a position of trust and derives commercial benefit from the sale. The complainant purchased an iPhone 11 for Rs 65,264 from a Croma store in Mumbai on June 4, 2021. Shortly after the purchase, the device developed an issue as the speakerphone function was not working during calls, with specifically "no speech from mic". The complainant approached Apple's authorised service centre, but repairs were denied on the grounds of "unauthorized modifications in the device," rendering it ineligible for warranty service. Despite repeated complaints and emails, the opposite parties failed to address the grievance, following which the complainant approached the commission. During the course of proceeding, the customer passed away, but the complaint was continued by his legal heirs. The Apple India Private Limited, in its response, admitted the purchase and the issue with the microphone. But it reiterated that the device had unauthorised modifications, voiding the warranty. Infiniti Retail Limited (Croma) failed to appear and was proceeded against ex-parte. The commission, after perusal of documents on record, held that Apple failed to specify exactly which term or condition of the warranty was breached by the complainant. "Merely referring clauses of warranty terms and condition cannot be sufficient to attribute the particular defect as certain unauthorized modification or damage to software," it noted. The commission concluded that documents and evidence brought on record are sufficient to ascertain the defect in goods coupled with deficiency in service provided by the opposite parties. It ruled that both the manufacturer and the seller are "jointly and severally liable for the defective product". The commission directed both the opposite parties to refund the iPhone cost of Rs 65,264, along with a 6 per cent interest per annum from the date of the complaint (August 6, 2021) until the date of actual payment. The two companies were also directed to pay Rs 15,000 as compensation for mental agony and Rs 2,000 for legal expenses to customer's family.
The Print
2 days ago
- Business
- The Print
Consumer panel asks Apple, Croma to refund customer's iPhone cost over microphone defect
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Mumbai (Suburban) held that the 'manufacturer (Apple) merely mentioning certain unauthorized modification or damage in hardware cannot be the correct resolution' for the customer's grievance. Both the manufacturer and the seller are 'jointly and severally liable for the defective product', the commission said in the order passed earlier this month, as the two companies failed to resolve the defect in the device purchased by the customer (now deceased). Mumbai, Jul 20 (PTI) A consumer commission here has directed Apple India and Croma to refund an i-Phone cost of Rs 65,264 to the legal heirs of a customer for failing to resolve a microphone defect in the device, holding the two companies deficient in service. It further ruled that the seller (Croma) too cannot escape liability merely by stating the 'defect is attributable to the manufacturer'. 'Once the product was sold through their outlet, they assumed responsibility for ensuring that the product was free from defects and serviceable,' the commission noted. It said the 'principle of vicarious liability squarely applies', as the seller stands in a position of trust and derives commercial benefit from the sale. The complainant purchased an iPhone 11 for Rs 65,264 from a Croma store in Mumbai on June 4, 2021. Shortly after the purchase, the device developed an issue as the speakerphone function was not working during calls, with specifically 'no speech from mic'. The complainant approached Apple's authorised service centre, but repairs were denied on the grounds of 'unauthorized modifications in the device,' rendering it ineligible for warranty service. Despite repeated complaints and emails, the opposite parties failed to address the grievance, following which the complainant approached the commission. During the course of proceeding, the customer passed away, but the complaint was continued by his legal heirs. The Apple India Private Limited, in its response, admitted the purchase and the issue with the microphone. But it reiterated that the device had unauthorised modifications, voiding the warranty. Infiniti Retail Limited (Croma) failed to appear and was proceeded against ex-parte. The commission, after perusal of documents on record, held that Apple failed to specify exactly which term or condition of the warranty was breached by the complainant. 'Merely referring clauses of warranty terms and condition cannot be sufficient to attribute the particular defect as certain unauthorized modification or damage to software,' it noted. The commission concluded that documents and evidence brought on record are sufficient to ascertain the defect in goods coupled with deficiency in service provided by the opposite parties. It ruled that both the manufacturer and the seller are 'jointly and severally liable for the defective product'. The commission directed both the opposite parties to refund the iPhone cost of Rs 65,264, along with a 6 per cent interest per annum from the date of the complaint (August 6, 2021) until the date of actual payment. The two companies were also directed to pay Rs 15,000 as compensation for mental agony and Rs 2,000 for legal expenses to customer's family. PTI AVI GK This report is auto-generated from PTI news service. ThePrint holds no responsibility for its content.
Time of India
6 days ago
- Business
- Time of India
Dreame Technology expands offline retail in India via Croma Partnership
Dreame Technology a smart home appliances manufacturer has officially launched its offline retail presence in India by partnering with Croma. With this partnership, Dreame Technology will offer its smart cleaning and grooming products to physical retail stores across 20+ cities, including metros and tier 1 & 2 locations. The company claims that the shoppers can explore wide range of products such as robotic vacuums , cordless stick vacuums, wet-and-dry cleaners, and grooming tools—at dedicated 'Dreame Zones' inside select Croma outlets. As a part of the introductory offer, starting from 15th July - 20th July customers can avail attractive offers on Dreame products across Croma stores and avail upto 10% additional discount on select credit card purchases from IDFC Bank, Amex, HSBC and Bank of Baroda. Additionally, No Cost EMI options are also available on select models. Whether you're upgrading your cleaning routine or investing in smarter home appliances, this is the perfect time to bring home Dreame's premium innovations at exceptional prices. Dreame has also rolled out dedicated after-sales infrastructure including a toll-free customer helpline, pickup & drop support, and on-site installation along with 2-year warranties on grooming products and 1-year coverage on cleaning devices—ensuring that ownership is as seamless as the purchase journey. Manu Sharma, managing director of Dreame India, emphasised the importance of building trust through in-store interaction: 'This offline presence is not just about increasing awareness—it's about fostering connection and helping Indian consumers discover how Dreame can enhance their daily lives through intelligent innovation' AI Masterclass for Students. Upskill Young Ones Today!– Join Now
