A consumer court directed Sony Mobile Communication along with its two sales and service outlets in Assam to pay more than Rs 50,000 to a woman, whose mobile phone was not repaired by the company nearly nine years ago.

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission of Kamrup in an order on July 26 directed Sony Mobile Communication, its retail outlet Sony Center at Christian Basti and Sony Service Center at Rajgarh Main Road to pay the compensation within 45 days.

The commission directed the three accused parties to pay an amount of Rs 40,000 with 10 per cent interest to the complainant Nina Bairagi for "physical harassment and mental agony" from the date of filing the case.

Further, they were directed to pay an amount of Rs 10,000 to the complainant as a cost of proceedings, the order stated.

The commission also mentioned in the judgment that if the decretal amount is not paid by the respondents within 45 days, then they will have to pay 12 per cent interest on the amount till its realisation.

After a prolonged trial and proceedings since the filing of the case in 2016, the commission convicted Sony Mobile for its deficiency in service and also directed to repair the mobile handset within 45 days besides paying the compensation.

Bairagi had purchased a Sony Mobile handset from the Sony Center on August 10, 2015, on payment of Rs 52,990. After one month, the phone dropped from her hand and as a result, it became inoperative.

The complainant had then approached the Sony Service Center, but the service engineer informed her that the repair of the said model was not available and the only option left was to get a replacement at a cost of Rs 25,000.

Bairagi had also contacted the service head of Sony Mobile at its country headquarters in New Delhi several times through emails but in spite of assurance to redress the grievance within 48 hours, it was not done.

After that, she filed a complaint with the Consumers' Legal Protection Forum, Assam. On the basis of that grievance, the forum filed a case with the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission of Kamrup.

The three respondents had in their written statement to the commission termed the complaint "frivolous" and was an "apt illustration of flagrant abuse of the benevolent provision of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986".

Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by The Telegraph Online staff and has been published from a syndicated feed.