Dispute over TV remote lands in Supreme Court

Despite a 45-day deadline set by the IHC, consumer court could not decide the case

ISLAMABAD: The highest court of the land on Friday has to adjudicate on a trivial issue that, according to legal experts, should have been settled at the level of consumer courts.

The Supreme Court, where the number of pending cases has already touched a mammoth 30,404, has to settle a dispute over faulty fixing of a TV remote-control that the owner claimed breached his trust.



Experts believe it is because of the failure of consumer courts and a general lack of awareness among people that that are pushing the number of pending case even higher in the Supreme Court.

They believe that exclusive courts for the rights of consumers would help in checking this trend as well as unethical practices by manufacturers as well as service providers in different fields.

Muhammad Akram Malik, who himself is a lawyer, had approached a consumer court against a mechanic of electrical appliances for damaging his TV remote-control.

The applicant contended that instead of repairing the remote-control, the mechanic namely, Ehsaan Raqib, badly damaged it. However, despite giving a 45-day deadline by the Islamabad High Court, the consumer court could not decide the case.

Upon this, the petitioner approached the Supreme Court despite the fact approximately Rs75,306 is the average litigation cost of a case there. The matter was fixed before a three-judge bench, headed by Justice Dost Muhammad Khan on Friday.

During the hearing, the petitioner, Advocate Muhammad Akram Malik, contended that he had given the TV remote-control of a foreign brand, but the respondent, Ehsaan Raqib, badly damaged it.

On the other hand, Raqib stated that he had given him a new TV remote-control, but the petitioner refused to take it on the pretext that it was made in China. It was witnessed during the proceedings that the petitioner’s arguments has amused the bench as well as the litigants, who were sitting in Courtroom No 1.

In the meantime, a lawyer, who was representing the mobile company in another case, came to the rostrum and offered to pay Rs5,000 in damages on behalf of the mechanic and the matter was disposed of. Later, the petitioner announced donating the money to the Edhi Foundation.

Meanwhile, the same bench also took the petitioner’s another case against a mobile company (that had issued a SIM on his name to another person and has refused to give that person’s data to him now). Applicant, Muhammad Akram Malik stated that though the SIM has been closed on his request, the company is refusing to provide information about the person, who was issued the SIM on his name.



On the other hand, the counsel for the mobile company stated that it could not disclose the information under the relevant law. However, the bench rejected that contention and ordered the mobile company to provide information within 10 days. Later, the court disposed of the matter.

Published in The Express Tribune, September 3^rd, 2016.