Haryana

Ambala

CC/28/2016

Lakhmir Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Director General Hoticulture - Opp.Party(s)

Ms Nirmaljeet Kaur

07 Dec 2017

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM AMBALA

 

                                                          Complaint case no.        : 28 of 2016

                                                          Date of Institution         : 05.01.2016

                                                          Date of decision   : 07.12.2017

 

Lakhmir Singh son of Sh. Mewa Singh, resident of village Nadiyali Post Office Matheri Sikhan, Police Station Naggal, Tehsil and District Ambala

……. Complainant.

Vs.

 

1.       Director General Horticulture, Panchkula (Hary.)

2.       M/s Various InnovativeSystem Hybrid Nano Utilities, 450, Industrial Area, Phase-I, Panchkula, (Hary.)

3.       District Horticulture Officer, near District Court Complex, Ambala City.   

….…. Opposite Parties.

 

Before:        Sh. D.N.Arora, President.

                   Ms. Anamika Gupta, Member.                  

 

Present:       Sh. Jaspal Singh, counsel for complainant.

                   Ms. Bala Devi,  counsel for Ops No.1 & 3.

                   OP No.2 already ex parte v.o.d. 14.03.2016.

 

ORDER:

                   In nutshell, brief facts of the present complaint is that the complainant was supplied a Motorized Vending Carts under the IHD Plan Scheme for SC Families  in the year 2013-2014 being entitlement of the complainant. The said cart was supplied to young unemployed schedule Caste  person by the OP No.3. The complainant deposited the prescribed amount @ 20% on 18.03.2015 vide Receipt No.64 to the tune of Rs. 20,000/- vide Bill no. 283 and two other receipts No.65 dated 18.03.2015 to the tune of Rs. 14,000/-and receipt No.66 dated 18.03.2015 to the tune of Rs.13,000/- in the name of complainant payment in favour of opposite party no.2. The OP No.3 has been intimated about the defective cart as well as defect in the maintenance as per the terms and conditions. The OP No.3 did not take any appropriate action, rather same cart was supplied by the OP No.3 manufactured by the OP No.2. The abovesaid vending carts were handed over by the Horticulture Department, Haryana through Ambala Horticulture Branch. The said cart only few months i.e. three months were in working condition, but lateron same is not in working condition. The complainant many times sent the message through mobile phone, at the instance of opposite party No.2 two times the said cart was repaired, but now making the excuse on one pretext or another, even today, the message was sent from the telephone No.9416430559 on the phone no.9888584450 to Mr. Sharma, who is owner of the M/s Various Innovative System Hybrid Nano Utilities, Panchkula. The said cart is under guarantee/maintenance for one year against the manufacturing defects. It is the duty of opposite party no.2 to remove the defects of the said Cart as same was supplied by the said agency on 18.03.2015. Same cart is not in working condition properly. The complainant is an unemployed young person, but has no other source of income to earn his livelihood. The livelihood of the complainant was dependent upon the said vehicle/Cart, therefore, he is depriving from his livelihood. He prayed for replacement of the said cart and further prayed for giving the Rs.50,000/- for causing the mental harassment to the complainant as well as rendering deficiency service and claim for litigation expenses. Hence, the present complaint.

2.                Upon notice, OPs  No.1 & 3 appeared through counsel and tendered written statement raising preliminary objections qua complaint is not maintainable, false & frivolous and jurisdiction etc. On merits, the counsel for the OPs no. 1 & 3 stated that the opposite parties no. 1 & 3 is neither manufacturer nor is having any technical team to access the defect  as alleged  in the complaint. It is further submitted that as per the empanelment order opposite party no.2 has to provide guarantee/ maintenance for one year against manufacturing defects. The opposite parties no. 1 & 3 have nothing to do or have any concern whatsoever in this behalf. It is further submitted that the complainant is claiming loss of rupees as alleged in the complaint is after thought, the complainant has neither produced any evidence to the effect the nature of defect in operation of cart. The OP No. 2 was proceeded against ex-parte v.o.d 14.03.2016. So, there is no deficiency on the part of the OPs No.1 & 3 and prayed for dismissal of the present complaint.

 3.               To prove his version complainant tendered his affidavit as Annexure C-1 along with documents as annexure C-2 to C-7 and close his evidence. On the other hand, counsel for the Ops No.1 & 3 has also tendered affidavit as Annexure R-1 alongwith documents as Annexure R-2 to R-15 and close their evidence.

4.                We have heard learned counsel for the parties and carefully gone through the case file. The case of the complainant is that the Motorized Vending Carts under the IHD Plan Scheme for SC Families in the year 2013-2014 was supplied to young unemployed schedule Caste person by the OP No.3. The complainant deposited the prescribed amount @ 20% on 18.03.2015 vide Receipt No.64 to the tune of Rs. 20,000/- vide Bill no. 283 and two other receipts No.65 dated 18.03.2015 to the tune of Rs. 14,000/-and receipt No.66 dated 18.03.2015 to the tune of Rs.13,000/- in the name of complainant payment in favour of opposite party no.2. The abovesaid carts were handed over by the Horticulture Department, Haryana through Ambala Horticulture Branch, Annexure C-2 with  warranty of one year. The vehicle in question started giving problems after few months i.e. three months. Therefore, the complainant brought in the knowledge of the OP No.2 who repaired the same but soon it again went out of order during warranty period. It is not disputed that the complainant had purchased the  vending cart which was handed over to him by OP No.3  manufactured by OP No.2. The OPs No. 1 and 3 have only released subsidy amount qua the purchased of said cart in favour of OP no.2, therefore, it was the duty of the OP No.2 to redress the grievance of the complainant qua the defect occurs  in the cart manufactured by it. In  the present case, neither the OP No.2 redress the grievance of the complainant to make the said cart roadworthy nor appeared in the  present complaint to contest/rebut the pleading putforth by the complainant which shows that the OP NO.2 has  failed to provide the service after selling of vending carts to the complainant whenever the complainant has paid the prescribed amount as per the terms and conditions of the Scheme to the OP No.2 because rest of the amount was released in favour of the OP No.2 by OP No.1 & 3 as subsidy under the scheme of the Government .

5.                Keeping in view, the facts and circumstances  of the case, we come to the conclusion  that the OP No.1 & 3 have no role to play in the subject matter  because neither they are manufacturer/dealer nor service center of the cart manufactured by OP No.2, therefore, the present complaint is against the OPs No. 1 and 3 is dismissed. The complaint against OP No.2 is allowed with costs which is assessed Rs. 3,000/- . The OP No.2 is further directed to comply with the following direction within thirty days from receipt of copy of the order:-

(i)      To replace the vending cart in question with new one of the same Model to the complainant by the OP No.2 of the same price, subject to return the vehicle in question to OP No.2 by the complainant.

(ii)     To pay the cost of proceedings Rs. 3,000/- as assessed.

                   Copy of the order be sent to the parties concerned, free of costs, as per rules. File after due compliance be consigned to record room.

Announced on:07.12.2017                                      (D.N. ARORA)

                                                                                       President

 

      

      (ANAMIKA GUPTA)

                                                                                       Member