Tamil Nadu

StateCommission

A/522/2023

BHIMBOYS COLD FOODS, - Complainant(s)

Versus

KALIAMOORTHY - Opp.Party(s)

V.BALAJI

26 Jun 2023

ORDER

IN THE TAMILNADU STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHENNAI - 3.

 

BEFORE    Hon’ble THIRU. JUSTICE  R. SUBBIAH             ::      PRESIDENT                       

                   Thiru.R VENKATESA PERUMAL                         ::      MEMBER

 

F.A. No.522/2023

 

(Against the Order made in C.C.No.80/2022 dated:09.09.2022 on the file of the

D.C.D.R.C., Tiruvarur)

 

DATED THE 26^TH DAY OF JUNE 2023

 

Bhim Boys Cold Foods,

No.SP152A, 4^th Lane,

First Main Road,

Ambattur Industrial Estate,

Chennai,

Tamil Nadu (33),

India – 600 058.                                                           ..  Appellant / Opposite party. 

 

-Versus-

Kaliyamoorthy,

Door No.3/102, Melaruthra Gangai Street,

Seruvarul Village,

Nanilam Taluk,

Thiruvarur District,

Represented by V. Balaguru,

Joint Secretary,

Tamil Nadu Consumer Protection Council,

Nanilam Branch,

Peralam – 609 405.                                                     .. Respondent  / Complainant.  

 

Counsel for the Appellant / Opposite party     : M/s. V. Balaji

 

Respondent  / Complainant                            : Party in person

 

This appeal coming before us on for final hearing today on 26.06.2023 and on hearing the arguments of both parties and on perusing the material records, this Commission made the following Order in the Open Court:-

ORDER

Thiru.R VENKATESA PERUMAL , MEMBER                       

1.     The opposite party before the District Commission is the appellant herein.    

2.         For the sake of convenience and brevity, the parties are referred to here as they stood arrayed in the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Tiruvarur.

3.         The case of the respondent before the District commission is that the complainant purchased a Popcorn machine on 27.01.2022 by paying a sum of Rs.22,500/- with the opposite party.   But the said, the machine was not functioning properly.    Hence, the complainant made a complaint with the opposite party over phone.   The opposite party had sent his technician to the complainant.   The technician on inspection of the Popcorn machine, asked the complainant to send the said machine to the opposite party company for doing the repair works.   Hence, the complainant on 21.03.2022 sent the said machine to the opposite party.   Since, the machine was not returned back after repairing, the complainant sent letters to the opposite party  on 30.03.2022 and 05.04.2022 to return the machine.  But the opposite party had not sent any reply.   The act of the opposite party caused great mental agony to the complainant.   Finally left with no other alternative, the complainant has filed the present complaint alleging deficiency in service claiming refund of a sum of Rs.22,500/- being the cost price of the Popcorn machine, Rs.5,000/- towards compensation for mental agony, stress etc. and Rs.10,000/- towards the cost of proceedings.   

4.         Though notice has been served on the opposite party, he did not appear before the District Commission.  Hence, the opposite  party was set exparte and the complaint was allowed directing the opposite party to refund a sum of Rs.22,500/- to the complainant, Rs.50,000/- towards compensation for mental agony and cost of Rs.5,000/- towards litigation expenses.   The above amounts shall be payable within 6 weeks failing which, 9% interest will be levied for the above amounts.

5.         Aggrieved over the said order, this appeal is preferred by the opposite party for setting aside the order and for a chance to contest the case on merits.

6.         The Learned Counsel for the appellant would contend that since the complainant had purchased the product for commercial purpose and hence, the complaint is not maintainable.   Therefore, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party.    The opposite party is having a fair chance to succeed the complaint.   The non-appearance of the appellant / opposite party is neither wilful nor wanton but due to the reasons beyond the control.   Thus, he prayed for an opportunity to contest the case on merits.

7.         We have heard the submissions on the side of both parties  and perused the materials placed on record. 

8.         Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for appellant, we are of the considered opinion that there is some force in the arguments of the appellant/ opposite party and therefore a chance may be given to the opposite party to agitate their right on merit.   Though there is a lethargic attitude on the part of the opposite party in appearing before the Commission, in the interest of justice,  this appeal is allowed today by remanding back the complaint to the District Commission for fresh disposal according to law. 

            In the result, the appeal is allowed by setting aside the order of the District Commission, Thiruvarur in C.C. No.80/2022 dt.09.09.2022 and the matter is remanded back to the District Commission, Thiruvarur for fresh disposal according to law on merit.

The parties are directed to appear before the District Commission, Thiruvarur on 26.07.2023, for taking further instructions. On which date itself, the opposite party shall file his Vakalath, Written version, proof affidavit and documents if any.  The District Commission is directed to dispose of the complaint, within three months from the date of appearance, according to law on merits.  

The amount deposited, by the appellant, shall remain in the custody of this Commission, till the order passed in the original complaint.

 

   R  VENKATESAPERUMAL                                                                    R. SUBBIAH

                 MEMBER                                                                            PRESIDENT

 

KIR/TNSCDRC/Chennai/Orders/June/2023.