Punjab

Faridkot

CC/18/160

M/s New Friends Marriage Palace - Complainant(s)

Versus

BKB Engineering Company - Opp.Party(s)

Vinod Kumar Monga

13 Aug 2019

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, FARIDKOT

 

C.C. No. :                      160 of 2018

Date of Institution:           26.09.2018

Date of Decision :            13.08.2019

 

M/s New Friends Marriage Palace, Sri Muktsar Sahib Road, Jaitu District Faridkot (Four Seasons Resorts) through its Partner Amrik Singh aged about 55 years son of Sukhninder Singh r/o Gumti Khurd, Tehsil Jaitu, District Faridkot.

...Complainant

Versus

BKB Engineering Company, Office cum residence :  House No.16390-A, Street No.15, Guru Gobind Singh Nagar, Barnala Bye-Pass, Bathinda-151001.

....Opposite Party

 

Complaint under Section 12 of the

Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

 

Quorum:     Sh. Ajit Aggarwal, President,

Smt. Param Pal Kaur, Member.

 

Present:      Sh Vinod Monga, Ld Counsel for complainant,    

                  Sh Dilshad Singh Dhaliwal, Ld Counsel for OP.

* * * * * * * * * *

ORDER

(Ajit Aggarwal, President)

                           Complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against Ops seeking directions to OPs to

cc no.-160 of 2018

pay Rs.83,700/- as repair charges and to refund Rs.6500/- and for further directing them to  pay Rs.20,000/- as compensation for mental agony and harassment besides litigation expenses of Rs.20,000/-.

2                                         Briefly stated, the case of the complainant is that complainant earns his livelihood through his marriage palace and for the purpose of providing security measures, complainant has installed fire extinguishers in his marriage palace and since 2010, Opposite party has been maintaining the fire extinguishers there and vide bill dated 15.09.2017, OP supplied or refilled the said fire extinguishers alongwith other infrastructure at marriage palace and charged Rs.6500/- for said services and also gave certificate dated 15.09.2017 to the effect that OP have refilled and tested the fire extinguishers and system existing in marriage palace and certified the same to be fit for further use and  OP also gave training for operation of fire extinguishers and said certificate was valid till 14.09.2018. On 24.06.2018 at about 2.00 pm when marriage function was going on in his palace, suddenly generator installed in his palace started emitting smoke and fire sparkles. Complainant alongwith others tried to use the said fire extinguishers as per training and directions of OP, but these did not work and due to this generator of complainant suffered great loss due to fire. Complainant immediately informed OP about this incident on telephone, but they paid no heed to this matter. Thereafter, complainant got examined his generator from J S Electricals, who  gave estimate for Rs.83,700/-as repair charges. Complainant approached Ops and made several requests to them to make payment of repair charges of Rs.83,700/-on account of repair of his generator and to refund Rs.6500/-which OP charged from

cc no.-160 of 2018

complainant for refilling the said fire extinguishers, but they did not hear him. even legal notice served upon by complainant to OP bore no fruit. All this amounts to deficiency in service and trade mal practice. Act of OP in not  providing effective services has caused huge harassment and mental agony to him. He has prayed for accepting the present complaint alongwith compensation and litigation expenses besides the main relief. Hence, the instant complaint.

3                                             The Counsel for complainant was heard with regard to admission of the complaint and vide order dated 3.10.2018, complaint was admitted and notice was ordered to be issued to the opposite party.

4                                                        On receipt of the notice, OP filed reply through counsel wherein asserted that complaint filed by complainant is false and frivolous and is based on baseless allegations. They have denied all the allegations being wrong and incorrect and asserted that complaint involves complicated questions of law and facts and requires heavy evidence, which is not possible in summary proceedings of this Forum and even no expert evidence is brought on record by the complainant. it is further averred that various types of fire extinguishers or cylinders such as ABC type which has Sodium Bicarbonate base and Nitrogen gas pressure and 2^nd type II which have Carbon Dioxide gas. It depends upon proper maintenance of seals to check the leakage of gases. The working of these cylinders also depends on maintenance of proper discharge pipes. It is admitted by OP that they refilled the fire extinguishing cylinder vide bill no.06 dated 15.09.2017, but denied the receipt of Rs.6500/- from complainant and averred that payment of this amount of Rs.6500/-is due towards complainant. It is further admitted that after

cc no.-160 of 2018

refilling the said cylinders, they gave training for operation of fire extinguishers and issued certificate to that effect, but altogether denied the allegation of complainant that fire extinguishers proved ineffective. Further averred that efficiency of extinguishers depends on its proper maintenance i.e to keep the seals intact to prevent leakage of gas and their proper handling at the time of fire. The complainant has not either maintained the said fire extinguishers properly or have not handled the same properly at the time of fire and there is no fault on the part of OP and they are not liable for the same. Moreover, Kirloskar generator of complainant did not suffer any damage. Further J S Electricals are not authorised by Kirloskar Company to repair the same and even they are not competent and qualified enough to carry on repair of said generator. Complainant has not suffered any loss due to them and they have denied all the allegations of complainant being wrong and incorrect and reiterated that there is no deficiency in service on their part and prayed for dismissal of complaint with costs.

5                                                Parties were given proper opportunities to produce evidence to prove their respective case. Ld counsel for complainant tendered in evidence affidavit of complainant Ex.C-1 and documents Ex C-2 to C-17 and then, closed the evidence.

6                                                         To controvert the allegations of complainant, ld counsel for OP tendered in evidence affidavit of Navdeep Singh Ex OP-1, document Ex OP-2 and then, closed the evidence on behalf of OP.

 

cc no.-160 of 2018

7                                        From the careful perusal of record and after going through evidence and documents produced on file by complainant as well as OPs, it is observed that case of complainant is that he earns his livelihood through his marriage palace. Fire extinguishers have been installed there since 2010 and Opposite party have been maintaining the same since long. Vide bill dated 15.09.2017, OP refilled the said fire extinguishers, charged Rs.6,500/- for said services and also gave certificate dated 15.09.2017 to the effect that they have refilled and tested the fire extinguishers and system existing in marriage palace and also certified the same to be fit for further use. OP also gave training for operation of fire extinguishers and said certificate was valid till 14.09.2018. On 24.06.2018 a marriage function was going on in his palace but suddenly generator installed there started emitting smoke and fire sparkles. Complainant alongwith others tried to use the said fire extinguishers as per training and directions of OP, but these did not work and due to this, generator of complainant caught fire and he suffered great loss due to fire. Complainant spent Rs.83,700/- on repair of his generator.  Grievance of the complainant is that despite his repeated requests, OP did not pay any heed to his genuine request regarding non functioning of fire extinguishers and his requests to make payment of Rs.83,700/-on account of repair of his generator and to refund Rs.6500/-which he paid for refilling the said fire extinguishers. In reply, stand taken by OP is that there is no fault on their part, rather complainant himself failed to maintain the said fire extinguishers and did not handle the same properly. There is no deficiency on their part and prayed for dismissal of complaint.

cc no.-160 of 2018

8                                            To prove his grievance, he has relied upon document Ex C-5 which is copy of bill dated 6.09.2013 that proves the pleadings of complainant that he got refilled 7 ABC Type Fire Extinguishers worth Rs.550/-each and one Carbon Dioxide Type Fire extinguisher worth Rs.550/-from OP and paid Rs 5029/-to OP for these including Rs.629/-VAT charges. ExC-6 is the copy of Test Certificate given by OP to complainant which was valid uptill 15.09.2014. Further Ex C-9 is copy of bill dated 15.09.2017 proves the fact that complainant got refilled his fire extinguisher cylinders from OP and paid Rs.6500/-to them for refilling the same. Ex C-10 copy of  Test Certificate dated 15.09.2017 issued by OP to complainant under their seal clearly reveals the fact that OP have tested the extinguishers got refilled by complainant and have also given proper training for operation of these at the time of fire and it is also clearly mentioned over it that this certificate is valid uptill 14.09.2018. Legal Notice Ex C-11 also reiterates the grievance of complainant. Ex C-13 affidavit of Jagtar Singh Proprietor J S Electrical Works  also supports the contentions of complainant that loss assessed for the repair of generator damaged in fire was of Rs.83,700/- and through estimate dated 3.07.2018, there remains no doubt that complainant had to pay Rs.83,700/- as repair charges for their damaged generator. Through his affidavit Ex C-1 complainant has reiterated his grievance. Other documents placed on record by complainant also support his pleadings. On the other hand, Opposite Party has  nothing on record to contradict the pleadings of complainant. Complainant has produced sufficient and cogent evidence that prove the fact that there is trade mal practice on the part of OP in not providing effective services to

cc no.-160 of 2018

complainant. Had they refilled the said fire extinguisher system properly and have given proper and adequate training to complainant regarding operation of said system, the fate of complaint would have been different. It is duly admitted by OP that they have sold and refilled the said fire extinguishers of complainant, but their denial that they have not received the service charges of Rs.6500/-from complainant has no legs to stand upon as it is matter of common observation that no one issues any bill unless payment for services provided, is made. There is no doubt that OP have been deficient in providing effective and immediate services to complainant which amounts to trade mal practice on their part. All this amounts to deficiency in service and has caused harassment to him.

9                                                 From the above discussion and keeping in view the evidence produced by parties, this Forum is of considered opinion that there is deficiency in service on the part of OP in not refilling the said fire extinguishing cylinders properly and in not providing proper training regarding operation of these cylinders to complainant in adequate way due to which generator of complainant got burnt and he had to pay repair charges for bringing the same in working condition. Complainant has suffered huge harassment and mental agony in all this. Therefore, present complaint is hereby allowed with direction to OP to pay Rs.65,000/- for the loss incurred to his generator alongwith interest at the rate of 8% per anum from 13.08.2018 i.e from the date of filing the present complaint till final realization. Opposite Party is further directed to pay Rs.5,000/-as consolidated compensation to complainant for harassment and mental agony suffered by him as well as for litigation expenses. Compliance of this order be made

cc no.-160 of 2018

within one month of receipt of the copy of the order, failing which complainant shall be entitled to proceed under Section 25 and 27 of the Consumer Protection Act. Copy of the order be supplied to parties free of cost. File be consigned to the record room. 

Announced in Open Forum

Dated: 13.08.2019

(Param Pal Kaur)                 (Ajit Aggarwal)  

          Member                               President