Haryana

Bhiwani

CC/89/2022

Pawan Kumar - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/S A S offset - Opp.Party(s)

Sanajy aggarwal

20 Nov 2023

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BHIWANI.

 

 Complaint Case No. : 89 of 2022

                                                             Date of Institution    : 13.05.2022

                                                             Date of Decision    :  20.11.2023

 

 

 

Pawan Kumar Mittal son of Sh. Ram Sawroop Mittal R/o M/s Mittal Printing Press, Near Ghanta Ghar Circular Road, Bhiwani, Tehsil and District Bhiwani.

                 …Complainant.

 

  Versus

 

1.       M/s A.S. Offset Works, Near Hari Mandal, Maliyana, Bagpat Road, Merrut through its Proprietor/authorized person Sh. Sarfraj.

 

2.       M/s Aaradhya Print Solution B-2/5, Old Colony, Modi Hospital, Modipuram, Merrut-10, through its Proprietor/authorized person.

 

 

                                                                                …Opposite Parties (OPs).

   

 

COMPLAINT U/S 35 OF CONSUMER PROECTION ACT, 2019.

 

 

BEFORE:    Hon’ble Mrs. Saroj Bala Bohra, Presiding Member.

Hon’ble Ms. Shashi Kiran Panwar, Member.

 

Present:-      Sh. Sanjay Aggarwal, Advocate for complainant.

         Ops exparte.

 

ORDER

 

Saroj Bala  Bohra, Presiding Member.

 

1.                 Brief facts of the present complaint are that on 18.11.2021, complainant purchased a second hand Printing Machine (Japanese Technology) of Tokio Company,Mark-4750 size 13x19 from OP No.2 through OP No.1.  Complainant has alleged that OP did not supply the purchased machine rather supplied another local machine, later on the wrongly supplied machine was called back by OPs and sent  another machine of Japanese Technology. Complainant has alleged that this machine was of very poor quality. OP assured for its service for one year.  Complainant has submitted that he paid Rs.48,970/-, Rs.80,000/-, Rs.41,300/- to the OPs and Rs.16,000/- to the driver/mechanic,  between 18.11.2021 to 15.12.2021. So, complainant agitated the matter before the OPs. Complainant has admitted that Rs.50,000/- was returned by the OP No.1 and Rs.35,000/- by OP No.2 only qua the present dispute.  So, complainant got served legal notice dated 01.02.2022 but of no avail which caused monetary loss as well as mental and physical harassment to the complainant. Further, the act & conduct of Ops amount to deficiency in service. Hence, the present complaint has been preferred seeking directions to OPs to recall the defective machine and to send the purchased machine described above or to refund the remaining amount alongwith interest @ 24% per annum till its realization. Further to pay Rs.50,000/- for harassment besides Rs.22000/- towards litigation expenses.

2.                 OPs did not bother to appear despite issuance of notice. As such, they were proceeded against exparte vide order dated 19.09.2022.

3.                 In exparte evidence of complainant, affidavit Annexure C1/A alongwith documents Annexure C-1 to Annexure C-22 were tendered and closed the evidence on 09.06.2023.

4.                 We have heard learned counsel for complainant and perused the record minutely.

5.                 Annexures C-3 to Annexure C-7, C-12, C-14, C-16, C-21 & C-22 reveals that complainant had purchased the alleged machine from the OPs and for this purpose Rs.80,000/- was paid online in between 07.11.2021 to 18.11.2021 vide Annexure C-8 to Annexure C-11.  Rs.48,790/- on 18.11.2021 vide Annexures C-13, C-17 & C-18  and Rs.41,300/- on 15.12.2021 vide Annexures C-15, C-19 & C-20 were also paid.  Thus the complainant paid a total sum of Rs.1,70,090/- to the OPs.

6.                 Allegedly, the OPs not sent the described machine, so complainant objected for the same before them.  In pursuant to that, complainant has admitted that he has received Rs.50,000/- from OP No.1 and Rs.35,000/- from OP No.2. The main prayer of complainant through this complaint is to get directions against the Ops, either to supply the purchased machine or to refund the remaining amount. To strengthen his case, complainant has filed his duly sworn affidavit Annexure C1/A alongwith copy of complaint made to S.P. Bhiwani (Annexure C-1) and copy of legal notice (Annexure C-2) which corroborates the version of complaint.  In view of the documents referred above as well as the fact that Ops did not defend their case as they remained exparte from the proceedings despite issuance of notices.  In such a situation, we have no option except to believe the version of complainant. Accordingly, we are of the view that the OPs were negligent, deficient in providing proper services to the complainant as well as has adopted unfair trade practice which dragged the complainant into this unwarranted litigation.  So, complainant must have suffered monetary loss as well as mental and physical harassment.  Accordingly, the complaint is allowed and OPs, jointly and severally, are directed to comply with the following directions within 40 days from the date of passing of this order:-

(i)       To refund Rs.85,090/- (Rs. Eighty five thousand ninety) to the complainant alongwith simple interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of this complaint till actual realization subject to return of the machine(s) in question by complainant.

 

(ii)      To pay a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Twenty thousand) to the complainant as compensation for harassment.

(iii)     Also to pay a sum of Rs.55,00/- (Rs.Five thousand five hundred) as litigation expenses.

                                                           

                    In case of default, the OPs shall liable to pay simple interest @ 12% per annum on all the aforesaid awarded amounts for the period of default. The complaint is allowed accordingly.  Certified copies of this order be sent to parties concerned, free of costs, as per rules. File be consigned to the record room, after due compliance.         

Announced.

Dated:20.11.2023.