policy of the Company to replace the handset

I was using tata ind since june 2003. on around may'05 I got exchanged my mobile set to LG 5235 .The said handset had
stopped working on 21-6-05 within a short period of about five weeks of its purchase.I immediately visited their N-10
office and and formerly lodged a complaint.I was asked to visit Authorised Service Centre (Arham Infotech Pvt Ltd),
Regal Bldg., New Delhi; So I visited their said Authorised Service Centre, and who reported that the handset had a major
fault of Main Board and that it was going to take minimum at least 2-3 days or more for the set to repair. But I wanted
the set to be replaced with a new one as it had been purchased hardly about five weeks back. I further stressed that
Iwas without the mobile service and the handset and that I am suffering a lot in his business financially. My mobile
service has been disrupted/discontinued by TATA INDICOM due to the faulty handset delivered to him by the company itself
despite paying monthly bills in full without failure.

I purchase it becozcause I had seen the brochures of the company. Through such brochures, I was induced to purchase a
handset. Such brochures contained misleading advertisements and induce public at large to purchase TATA INDICOM products
which are not at all worthy of reliance.

5.That instead of replacing the handset, I was shocked to receive reply that as per policy of the Company, handset
cannot be replaced. It would be pertinent to point out that your reply is totally contrary to the Warranty Certificate,
issued by your Company. Serial No. 3 reads as under:-

â??DURING THE WARRANTY PERIOD, SELLER OR ITS AUTHORISED SERVICE NETWORK WILL REPAIR OR REPLACE, AT SELLERâ??S OPTION, THE
PRODUCT OR ANY RELEVANT PARTS THEREOF IN THE EVENT THAT THE PRODUCT IS FOUND TO BE DEFECTIVE.â??

Thus to say that it is not the policy of the Company to replace the handset, is absolutely wrong and the Company has just
tried to waylay the real issue of the provision of proper mobile service to our client. The above mentioned Warranty
Certificate Condition clearly mentions that the Seller can replace the handset, if it opts to do so. Thus the policy
of the Company can be moulded by it arbitrarily on its own whims and fancies, which is not at all warranted under the
circumstances of the case, because the handset became completely unusable within a short period of about five weeks. Now
I have sued them in consumer court .Plz give me more proofs