By Sri. MOHANDASAN.K, PRESIDENT
1.The complaint in short is as follows: -
The complainant running an oil mill at Kavanoor and he decided to purchase an electric dryer Machine for Coconut drying purpose. The complainant heard about opposite party that he is making electric dryer machine and approached the opposite party. The opposite party explained all the specification of copra dryer machine. He said that the price of the machine as Rs. 1,03,000/- and it will work with 2,000watts electricity for 12 hours and also assured that it has got one year service warranty. Accordingly, he purchased Copra dryer machine on 11/02/2021 remitting Rs.1,03,000/-.
2. While he started to operate the electric dryer machine in accordance with the direction of opposite party, the complainant could realise that the machine consuming more than double electricity power as against assurance of the opposite party. The normal electricity bill of the complainant prior to the installation of Copra dryer was Rs. 3000/- and thereafter it was appeared more than Rs.10,000/-. The complainant examined the machine through qualified electrician and found that the Copra dryer consumes average 14000 watts. Realising the facts, the complainant contacted the opposite party and submitted his grievance about excess consumption of energy as against the assurance of the opposite party, but the opposite party did not care of complaint. He said that, it will be alright and the machine will work with 2000 watts electricity. The opposite party did not turn to examine the allegation of the complainant through inspecting the machine. Even then complainant continued to operate the machine for certain days also. But he could realise the consumption of the electricity was on higher side and he was served with electricity bill for more than Rs.10,000/-.The complainant submits that the electricity bill for the month 2021 May was Rs.8472/-, in June Rs.9592/-, July Rs. 12,822/-, August Rs.10,358/-, September Rs. 9397/-. Hence the complainant stopped the functioning of the machine and again approached the opposite party and informed the opposite party that he is not able to operate the machine by suffering huge loss and demanded to rectify the defects, if at all the consumption of electricity was due to any defects to the machine. But the attempt of the complainant was turned futile, the opposite party did not care to inspect the machine, but evaded the complainant. The opposite party turned to state that he had not agreed that the machine will work with 2000 watts electricity. The complainant submits that, the assurance of the complainant regarding the consumption of electricity as 2000 watts was not an oral statement but the same had sticked over the machine. The complainant purchased machine only on the basis of assurance given by the opposite party that the machine will work with consumption of 2000 watts electricity. The opposite party, with malicious intention and to grab money from the consumers made propaganda which is actually was not correct. The representation of the opposite party regarding the performance of the machine was not correct and misleading one. Due to the act of the opposite party, the complainant met with huge loss and also on enquiry, he could realize that the machine sold by the opposite party was with defects and there were number of complaints regarding the products and opposite party had compelled to refund the cost of machine to consumers.
3. Due to the unfair trade practice and defective service from the side of the opposite party, the complainant approached the Police with grievance and the police officials summoned the opposite party and had instructed to refund the cost of the product, but he has not done it. Due to the unfair trade practice and deficiency in service on the part of opposite party, complainant constrained to approach this Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission for there dressal of grievance.
4. The prayer of the complainant is to refund the cost of machine Rs. 1,03,000/- along with Rs. 2,00,000/- towards the financial loss and Rs. 1,00,000/- for the deficiency in service and thereby caused inconvenience, hard ships and mental agony to the complainant and also cost of Rs. 10,000/-.
5. On admission of the complaint notice was issued to the opposite party and despite of service of notice, the opposite party did not turn up and so set as exparte.
6. The complainant filed affidavit and documents. The documents marked as Ext. A1 to A7. Ext.A1 is a cash bill dated 11/02/2021. Ext.A2 series are photographs. Ext.A3 is photo of sticker over the machine. Ext. A4 series are printout of electricity bill payments. Ext.A5 is a copy of complaint submitted before the Sub inspector of Police, Areecode. Ext.A6 is a receipt of complaint issued by Areecode police dated 16/09/2021, Ext.A7 is an Expert opinion issued by One Mr. Ali. V, VK Engineering Electrical Supervisor.
7. The opposite party being set exparte no version, no affidavit and no document has been filed.
8. Hence the case of complainant stands proved through the affidavit and documents. There is no contra evidence against the contention of the complainant. Hence we allow the complaint as follows:-
- The opposite party is directed to refund the cost of the machine Rs. 1,03,000/-
(Rupees One lakh and three thousand only) to the complainant.
- The opposite party is directed to pay Rs.1,00,000/-(Rupees One lakh only) towards the financial loss sustained to the complainant on account of excess consumption of electricity and there by incurred financial loss to the complainant.
- The opposite party is also directed to pay Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) as compensation on account of unfair trade practice and deficiency in service and there by caused inconvenience, hard ships and mental agony to the complainant.
- The opposite party is also Rs. 10,000/-(Rupees Ten thousand only) as cost of the proceedings.
The opposite party shall comply this order within one month from the date of receipt of copy of this order, failing which the above said entire amount will carry interest @ 12% per annum from the date of filing this complaint till realization.
Dated this 2ndday of August, 2022.
MOHANDASAN K., PRESIDENT
PREETHI SIVARAMAN C., MEMBER
MOHAMED ISMAYIL C.V., MEMBER
APPENDIX
Witness examined on the side of the complainant : Nil
Documents marked on the side of the complainant : Ext.A1to A9
Ext.A1 : Cash bill dated 11/02/2021.
Ext.A2 : Series are photographs.
Ext.A3 : Photo of sticker over the machine.
Ext.A4 : Series are printout of electricity bill payments.
Ext.A5: Copy of complaint submitted before the Sub inspector of Police, Areecode. Ext.A6 : Receipt of complaint issued by Areecode police dated 16/09/2021.
Ext.A7 : Expert opinion issued by One Mr. Ali. V, VK Engineering Electrical Supervisor.
Witness examined on the side of the opposite party : Nil
Documents marked on the side of the opposite party : Nil
MOHANDASAN K., PRESIDENT
PREETHI SIVARAMAN C., MEMBER
MOHAMED ISMAYIL C.V., MEMBER
