Kerala

Trissur

CC/06/1051

M.O. Basheer - Complainant(s)

Versus

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

A.D. Benny

28 Oct 2010

ORDER

 
Complaint Case No. CC/06/1051
 
1. M.O. Basheer
Proprietor, Basheer Stores, Madekkadavu, Chavakkad.
 
BEFORE: 
 HONORABLE Padmini Sudheesh PRESIDENT
 HONORABLE Rajani P.S. Member
 HONORABLE Sasidharan M.S Member
 
PRESENT:A.D. Benny, Advocate for the Complainant 1
 Sheeba Faisal and Benny.P. Thekketh, Advocate for the Opp. Party 1
ORDER

 

 
 
By Smt. Rajani.P.S, Member:
 
          The complainant’s case is as follows: On 15.11.05 the complainant purchased an electronic weighing machine as per invoice No.A-888 from the respondent. Though the machine was bought for Rs.7500/-, the respondent issued receipt for only Rs.4000/-. The representatives of the respondent approached the complainant’s shop and taken orders and delivered the machine. The complainant is doing the business under self employment for his livelihood. While using the machine it was blasted and caused damage. The complainant believes that it was so happened as the product was having manufacturing defect and also due to inferior quality. The complainant informed the earlier said incident to the respondent.  But they were not turned up. Hence a lawyer notice was sent on 28.7.06. In their reply notice the respondent informed that they are ready to send a technician. But not kept their words. Again a lawyer notice was sent for the same. But no remedy after that also. The act of the respondent is an unfair trade practice. Hence the complaint.
 
          2. The respondent is called absent and set exparte.
 
          3. To prove the case of the complainant, he filed an affidavit and the documents produced are marked as Exts. P1 to P4. 
 
          4. According to the complainant, he purchased an electronic weighing machine on 15.11.05 from the respondent. Though the machine was bought for Rs.7500/-, the respondent issued receipt for only Rs.4000/-. While using the device it blasted and caused damage. The said incident was informed to the respondent. But the respondent never had taken any action to repair the machine. The damage was happened within the warranty period. 
 
          5. There is no counter evidence.
 
          6. In the result, the complaint is allowed and the respondent is directed to return the amount claimed and Rs.5000/- (Rupees five thousand only) as compensation and Rs.500/- (Rupees five hundred only) as costs within one month from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
         
 
 
          Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the open Forum, this the 28th day of October 2010.
 
 
[HONORABLE Padmini Sudheesh]
PRESIDENT
 
[HONORABLE Rajani P.S.]
Member
 
[HONORABLE Sasidharan M.S]
Member

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.