The complainant alleged in the complaint that he had purchased a fine cleaner alongwith screw conveyor from the opposite party vide bill No.0481 dated 29/9/06 for a sum of Rs.5,49,999.84 paise and the opposite party had installed the same in the month of Oct.2006. It is further alleged that above said fine cleaner was put to trial and during that proess screw conveyor showed defect. Complainant made complaint in Oct.2006 but the opposite party attended the complaint on 27/2/2007 and then again on 4/3/2007 and accordingly opposite party supplied conveyor to the complainant vide invoice No.0153 and fitted on 19/6/07 in the presence of officials of opposite party but the machine did not work properly and again complainant lodged complaints with the opposite party on various dates. Then opposite party Company supplied screen vide invoice NO. 0061 on 25/4/2008 and fitted the same in the machine but the machine started giving vibration and the complainant noted that frame of the machine was not correct and it had developed cracks due to vibration. Once again a complaint was lodged with the opposite party who assured that within two/three days the machine would be put to use on 14/7/2008 one Jatinder came from opposite party and despite assurance to supply the replacement, did not do his job on the machine and till then nothing has been heard from the opposite party to set right the machine which is a clear cut case of deficiency in service on the part of opposite party against which complainant is entitled to reliefs as mentioned in the prayer clause.<br /> 2. Opposite party appeared through counsel and contested the case of the complainant. It is admitted that complainant had purchased the machine in question. It is denied that if there was any defect at the time of installation of machine. It is pleaded that if the opposite party has been diligent in attending the complaints. However, it is admitted that the opposite party received complaints from complainant seeking service of the machinery but it is submitted that on receipt of the complaints, they immediately attended the same . The facts regarding change of defective parts as mentioned in the complaint and set right the same by the opposite parties had been admitted in the written statement. It is pleaded that since the complaints of the complainant were looked into, even though the opposite party was not obliged to do so, as all the mishaps in the machinery had occurred on account of the folly on the part of complainant itself. . <br /> 3. In support of his version complainant has produced in evidence affidavit of Shiv Kumar Director of the Company Ex.CA and other documents Ex.C1 to C12.<br /> 4. On the other hand opposite parties produced into evidence affidavit and documents Ex.R1 to R13.<br /> 5. We have heard arguments o learned counsel for the parties and perused ocular as well as documentary evidence on the record. In this case purchase of the machine by the complainant from the opposite party is not disputed and Ex.C4 is the service report. In this report, Engineer of the Company has mentioned certain defects in the working of the machine purchased from the opposite party. Ex.C5 is also service report. Ex.C8 is complaint regarding fine cleaner and Ex.C9 is request for replacement of screens in U.B. 1500 machine. Counsel for the parties admitted all these facts . Counsel for opposite party also states that opposite party Company is still co-operating with the complainant. This machine was purchased in the year 2006 and with the passage of time , it had developed defects but the foundation where the machine was fitted was also very weak and due to this reason, machine is causing vibrations. The Engineer of the opposite party has visited the premises of the complainant several times<br /> So after hearing both the parties, we direct the opposite parties to depute skilled Engineer to check the entire working of the machine and to replace defective parts with new one if they are under the period of warranty and against charges if the warranty period is over. The engineer of the opposite party will ensure smooth working of the machine to the satisfaction of the complainant within one month from the receipt of copy of this order.. We are not imposing any penalty on the opposite parties due to the fact that opposite parties are fully co-operating with the complainant, so the parties are left to bear their own costs.<br /> <br /> <br /> Let certified copies of order be supplied to the parties and thereafter file be consigned to record room.<br /> <br /> Announced : Shashi Narang Paramjit Singh<br /> 17.6.2009 Member President<br /> <br />