Kerala

Trissur

CC/08/899

P.H.Salim - Complainant(s)

Versus

Meezan Electronic Scale Pvt Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

Adv.A.D.Benny

30 May 2009

ORDER


CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
Ayyanthole , Thrissur
consumer case(CC) No. CC/08/899

P.H.Salim
...........Appellant(s)

Vs.

Meezan Electronic Scale Pvt Ltd
...........Respondent(s)


BEFORE:
1. Padmini Sudheesh 2. Rajani P.S. 3. Sasidharan M.S

Complainant(s)/Appellant(s):
1. P.H.Salim

OppositeParty/Respondent(s):
1. Meezan Electronic Scale Pvt Ltd

OppositeParty/Respondent(s):
1. Adv.A.D.Benny

OppositeParty/Respondent(s):




ORDER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.

 

 
By Smt. Padmini Sudheesh, President:
 
            The complainant’s case is as follows: On 12.11.07 the complainant purchased an electronic weighing machine for an amount of Rs.5500/- from the respondent. But the display and charges were not come and the defect repeated for several times. Upon the complaint made by the complainant, the respondent demanded to send the product and he sent it back. After repair the complainant got only the display board. Again upon the complaint of the complainant the respondent agreed to send the rest of the parts. But never done so till this time. The act of the respondent is an unfair trade practice. The complainant is doing the business for his livelihood. A lawyer notice was sent on 27th October 2008. But no remedy. Hence the complaint. 
            2. The respondent is called absent and set exparte. 
 
            3. To prove the case of the complainant, he had filed an affidavit and the documents produced by him are marked as Exts. P1 to P4. 
 
            4. According to the complainant, he had purchased an electronic balance machine on 12.11.07 from the respondent for an amount of Rs.5500/-. The respondent offered high quality for the product. But the product showed defects and had sent back the product for repair to the respondent. The complainant got only the display board when it was sent after repair. When it was informed, the respondent agreed to send the rest of the parts. But not do so. There is no remedy even after the acceptance of the lawyer notice. Hence the complaint. Ext. P1 is the invoice card to show the purchase of the product. Ext. P2 shows that the product has been sent for repair. There is no counter evidence to the evidence of the complainant.
 
            5. In the result, the complaint is allowed and the respondent is directed to return Rs.5500/- (Rupees five thousand and five hundred only) the amount of the product and an amount of Rs.2000/- (Rupees two thousand only) as compensation and Rs.500/- (Rupees five hundred only) as costs to complainant within two months.
           

            Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the open Forum, this the 30th day of May 2009.




......................Padmini Sudheesh
......................Rajani P.S.
......................Sasidharan M.S