Date of filing:-07/07/2018.
Date of Order:-10/04/2019.
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM(COURT)
B A R G A R H.
Consumer Complaint No. 47 of 2018.
Purandar Bhoi S/o Late Pitambara Bhoi, aged about 59 (fifty nine) years, Occupation- Cultivation, R/o/P.o- Jamla, P.s Padampur, Dist-Bargarh.
..... ..... ..... ..... Complainant.
Vrs.
Janata Hydro Mechanics, Gujurat represented through it’s Proprietor-Cum-Manager, I.S.O, 9001: 2008 in care of Janata Tyles Panchasar Road, Near Geeta oil Mill, Morbi 363641, Gujarat India. ..... ..... ..... Opposite Parties.
Counsel for the Parties:-
For the Complainant :- Sri S.P.Mishra, Advocate.
For the Opposite Party:- Him-self.
-: P R E S E N T :-
Sri Krishna Prasad Mishra ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... P r e s i d e n t.
Ajanta Subhadarsinee ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... M e m b e r (W).
Dt.10/04/2019. -: J U D G E M E N T:-
Presented by Sri Krishna Prasad Mishra, President:-
The brief facts of the case is as follows:-
That the Complainant is that he contacted the Opposite Party for purchasing a Fly Bricks manufacturing machine from him on getting information that he is the Manufacturer and seller of the same in the year 2016. Then the Complainant purchased the said Machine from the Opposite Party for his self employment by paying an amount of Rs.10,00,000/-(Rupees ten lakhs)only in lieu of the cost of the machine in cash and also through Bank in shape of Bank Draft against which the Opposite Party has acknowledged by issuing retail Invoice Dt.06.07.2016 against his quotation issued in favor of the Complainant through his authorized signatories Vide No-1414 Dtd 22.04.2016 for an amount of Rs.10,13,250/-(Rupees ten lakhs thirteen thousand two hundred fifty) only.
There after the Opposite Party delivered the said machine through his authorized personnel in the house of the Complainant mentioned in the cause title of the complaint and also installed the same thereon in the premises of the Complainant by his said persons in the month of July-2016.
The further case of the Complainant is that during the course of the use of the said machine for producing the fly ash, the said machine found to be a defective one during the subsistence of the warranty period of the same, to which the Complainant informed to the Opposite Party and in response the Opposite Party sent some of his mechanics but as it was not taken proper care by him as such the same became completely defunct in due course of time in the month of March-2017 which is clear case of deficiencies of rendering him service, consequent upon which he suffered both mental and financial loss emburdened with heavy rate of interest by the Financer Bank, however on the repeated complain made by the Complainant the Opposite Party advised him to send the same to him for repair and accordingly he sent the same machine to the Opposite Party for proper repair or in the alternative to replace the same with a new one on Dt. 24.05.2017 through a private truck bearing No. GJ-03-BV-9273 which was also duly received by the Opposite Party for which on being asked orally by the Opposite Party the Complainant has paid an amount of Rs.3,20,000/-(Rupees three lakh twenty thousand)only in excess of the invoice retail price of the same, but for a long time after receipt of the same he did not do anything to the knowledge of the Complainant till Dt. 21.03.2018 when he informed that the same machine was found to be a defective one so he would deliver the same after thorough repair of the same shortly but to the utter surprise the same has not yet been delivered to him, which is a clear cut case of un-fair trade practice with deficiencies of service on the part of the Opposite Party as has claimed by the Complainant to have undergone a massive mental agony and Financial Loss.
Furthermore the case of the Complainant in view of the above facts and circumstances the Opposite Party ought to have returned the said machine in a completely running condition or in the alternative should have refunded the price of the machine with the further amount of Rs.3,20,000/- (Rupees three lakh twenty thousand)only but neither he delivered him the machine nor refunded him the said amount till yet as such seeing no alternative the Complainant served him with a pleader Notice through his Advocate but to no result consequent upon which the cause of action of the case has arosed and has filed the case before the Forum with a prayer to issue a direction to the Opposite Party to replace the machine with an identical brand new one and to refund and Rs.3,20,000/-(Rupees three lakh twenty thousand)only taken by him during the course of repair as it was within the warranty period and also prays for a direction to the Opposite Party to pay him an amount of Rs.3,00,000/-(Rupees three lakh)only towards his mental agony and financial harassment caused to him by the Opposite Party.
And in support of his case the Complainant has relied on the following documents:-
Voter I.D. and the Adhara card of the Complainant.
The retail Invoice Xerox copy vide quotation/proforma invoice vide No-1414 Dt. 22.04.2016 amounting to Rs. 10,13,250/-(Rupees ten lakh thirteen thousand two hundred fifty)only.
Retail Invoice vide No.T-14. Dt.06.07.2016.
Way bill showing the transportation of the same by the Opposite Party on Dt.07.07.2016 through the transferrer consignor of the goods Janata Hydro Mechanics.
The Transport Documents showing the transportation of the same Machine by the Opposite Party to the Complainant.
The delivery Challan showing the return of the machine by the Complainant to the Opposite Party on Dt. 24.05.2017.
A letter sent to the Complainant by the Opposite Party with an endorsement therein relating to the repair and delivery of the same.
The Bank statement showing the payments made to the Opposite Party by the Complainant through bank.
Having gone through the complaint, the supporting Documents as alleged by the Complainant relating the transaction between the parties and on hearing the Advocate for the Complainant, the case was found to be a genuine as such was admitted and notice to the Opposite Party was served with a direction to appear and file his version on the date fixed.
So far as the rival contention of the Opposite Party as has mentioned in his version which he himself has drafted and has sent the same to the Forum by registered post which are are all evasive one except the contention made by him that since the transaction has been made at Morbi Gujarat, the present Forum has got no Jurisdiction to entertain the case and has flatly denied all the averments made by the Complainant in his complaint and as such has prayed to dismiss the case of the Complainant.
On perusal of record it came to our notice that the complaint was admitted and notice was duly served and the same was received by the Opposite Party but instead of personally appearing before the Forum he preferred to send his version to the Forum by post and also did not appear before the Forum on the date of hearing of the case and was absent on repeated call, however we considered it to be judicious to take up the proceeding of the hearing of the case on hearing the Advocate for the Complainant and on perusal of the version of the Opposite party on merit.
And on perusal of the complaint and the documents accompanied with it and on hearing his Counsel and on perusal of the version of the Opposite Party the following issues have come up before us to adjudicate the case.
Whether the present Forum has territorial Jurisdiction to entertain the case ?
Whether the Opposite Party has committed deficiencies of service and un-fair trade practice against the Complainant ?
Whether the Complainant is entitled to any relief as has been sought for by him ?
While considering the issue No. 1(one), as to whether the case is barred by territorial jurisdiction, on magnified scrutiny of the complaint and the materials available on record it clearly reveals that the part of cause of action of filling of the case has taken place at the residence of the Complainant as it has been observed that the same machine in question has been delivered and installed at the house of the Complainant which has been fortified by the way bill, invoice copy and transport challan of the Opposite Party being duely endorsed by the legal authority of the Government in transporting the same to the house of the Complainant and also it has been observed that the experts personnel of the Opposite Party have installed the machine which is quite evident from the materials available in the record specifically in it’s terms and condition envisaged in it’s m/c specification that the machine would be freely installed by the Opposite Party and the same has not been specifically denied by the Opposite Party which made us to believe that the cause of action in filing of the Complainant before the Forum is very much within the Jurisdiction of the Forum hence in our prudent view the case is maintainable before the Forum hence answered in favor of the Complainant.
Secondly while adjudicating the issue No. 2(two) as to whether the Opposite Party has caused deficiencies of service and has committed un-fair trade practice against the Complainant, in this context having gone through the complaint, the documents accompanied with the same and the version of the Opposite Party that it has has been admitted by the Opposite Party that the said machine in question has gone out of order and the same has been transported by the Complainant with due information to the Opposite Party and has also been observed from the material available in the record that the same has been duely received by the Opposite Party and also has been admitted by him to have found some major mechanical problem with the same and has assured by him to take necessary repair work and shortly after it’s repair would return the same to the Complainant which is clearly evident from the letter Dt.21.03.2018 sent to the Complainant by the Opposite Party in it’s Letter pad, but as per the Complainant’s case the same has not yet been delivered to him, which clearly speaks the callousness on his part which amounts to deficiencies in rendering service to the Complainant in furtherance the Opposite Party has been found to have committed un-fair trade practice as has not supplied the trouble free new model of the said machine nor have refunded the price of the machine, instead has taken further amounts of Rs.3,20,000/-(Rupees three lakh twenty thousand)only for undertaking repair work though the same was found to have given trouble within the warranty period as has been mentioned in it’s warranty book-let of the Opposite Party for which the Complainant has to undergo a lot of financial crisis out of such activities of the Opposite Party it clearly proves the case of un-fair trade practice on his part against the Complainant as such in our view in view of the above facts and circumstances, the Opposite Party has committed deficiencies in rendering service coupled with un-fair trade practice against the Complainant as such our view is expressed against the Opposite Party.
Thirdly while scrutinizing the issue No. 3(three) as to whether the Complainant is entitled to any relief, in this context as we have already examined the case in details and have found the Opposite Party to have committed deficiencies in rendering service coupled with un-fair trade practice and have already expressed our view in favor of the Complainant, And also it has been observed from the materials available in the record that the Complainant has suffered a lot mentally financially and physically caused to have undergone by such act of the Opposite Party now it is obvious upon us to express our view accordingly in favor of the Complainant and hence our order follows.
O R D E R
Hence in view of the above facts and circumstances the Opposite Party is liable to return a new machine with the same standard machine to the Complainant or in the alternative refund him with the retail price which he has received amounting to Rs.10,13,250/-(Rupees ten lakh thirteen thousand two hundred fifty)only and Rs.3,20,000/-(Rupees three lakh twenty thousand)only which he has taken for further repair of the same with an interest @ 8% (eight percent) per annum from the date of filing of this case till the date of Order hand also directed to pay him an amount of Rs.20,000/-(Rupees twenty thousand)only in lieu of compensation for the mental, physical and financial loss sustained by the Complainant within thirty days from the date of receipt of the Order or else the would be liable to pay the whole amount with an interest @ 12%(twelve percent) per annum which would be carried out till the actual realization of the whole amount.
Accordingly the Order is pronounced in the Open Forum and the case is allowed against the Opposite Party and the same is disposed off.
Typed to my dictation
and corrected by me.
( Sri Krishna Prasad Mishra)
P r e s i d e n t.
I agree,
( Ajanta Subhadarsinee)
M e m b e r (W)
Upload by
Sri Dusmanta Padhan,
Office Assistant (D.M.A.)
