District Consumer Disputes Redressel Forum, Fatehgarh Sahib<br />  <br /> Complaint No. 150 dated108.08.07<br />         Date of Decision: 04.02.2008<br />  <br /> Lakhbir Singh S/o Sh. Prem Singh resident of village Gandhuan Kalan Tehsil Bassi Pathana Distt. Fatehgarh Sahib.<br />  <br /> Complainant<br /> Versus<br />  <br /> M/s Gobind Machinery Stores, G. T. Road near double Phatak below Hotel Nayyar, Classic, Ludhiana through its signatory <br />                                                                                   Opposite Party<br />  <br />  Present:-     Sh. G. S. Virk, counsel for the complainant<br />               Sh. P. S. Ladhar, counsel for the opposite parties.<br />  <br /> Order<br />   Lakhbir Singh has directed this complaint against M/s Gobind Machinery Store by alleging that he has filed the complaint which was withdrawn as there was technical and formal defect in it and he was permitted to file a fresh one and he has filed this complaint. It is alleged that the complainant is running an Atta Chakki for his livelihood at village Gandhuan Kalan. It is also alleged that he has purchased one pair of stone for the atta chakki vide bill dated 07.07.07 for the amount of Rs. 2050/- and the opposite party has received the amount of Rs. 2132/- from the complainant i.e Rs. 2050/- as amount of the stone and Rs. 82 as vat charges. It is also alleged that the opposite party has delivered the said stone at the atta chakki of the complainant at village Gandhuan Kalan. It is also alleged that he has given Rs. 300/- as service charges to reach the said stone on his atta chakki. It is also alleged that the opposite party has given the guarantee of one year with regard to the said stone on any defect and promised to replace the same. It is also alleged that about six months from the purchase of the said stone, the said stone was not working properly in the atta chakki. It is also alleged that the concrete of the stone is not of good quality and some parts of the concrete used to be mixed in the flour/atta and the clients returned the said flour/atta to the complainant and thus he has suffered financial loss. The complainant has also alleged that he has requested the opposite party to replace the said stone but to no effect. It is also alleged that the notice was also sent to the opposite party through the counsel to replace the stone but to no effect and thus he has filed this complaint. <br />  2.                The opposite party has contested the complaint and raised preliminary objections that the complaint is not maintainable, that the complainant is misuse and abuse of the process of law, that this forum has no jurisdiction that the complainant is false, frivolous and vexatious, that the complainant has no locus standi or cause of action to file the present complaint, that the complainant is estopped by his own act and conduct to file the present complaint and that the complainant has concealed the true and material facts from the Hon’ble forum. On merits it is alleged that the complainant has purchased one pair of stone vide bill as alleged by the complainant and he has received the said stone. It is also alleged that the said stone was in working condition and the complainant has paid Rs. 1500/- to the opposite party on that day and further agreed to pay remaining amount Rs. 632/- later on and he has not paid the said amount. The stone when supplied was in prefect order and the complainant has not made any complaint w.e.f. 07.07.06 till 02.04.07. It is also alleged that there was no guarantee regarding the said stone.  The opposite party has denied the other allegation. <br />  3.                Counsel for the complainant has tendered in the evidence affidavit of complainant Ex CW1/A, original bill dated 07.07.06 Ex C-1, copy of notice dated 02.04.07 Ex C-2, original postal receipt Ex C-3 and closed the evidence. <br />  4.                Counsel for the opposite party has tendered in evidence affidavit of Rakesh Kumar, Prop Ex R1/A and legal notice Ex R2 and closed the evidence. <br />  5                 We have gone through the record and have heard ld. counsel for the parties.<br />  6                 The complainant has alleged that he has purchased one pair of stone for atta chakki vide bill Ex C-1 dt. 7/7/06. The complainant has also filed his affidavit Ex CW1/A in this regard. The complainant has also placed on file bill Ex C-1 dt. 7/7/06 which reveals that the opposite party has sold one pair of stone for Rs. 2050/- plus vat charges of Rs. 82/- and the total amount was Rs. 2132/-. It is also mentioned in the said bill Ex C-1 that the cash amount of the said bill has been received. The opposite party has also admitted in the written statement as well as in the affidavit of Rakesh Kumar, Prop Ex R1/A that the complainant has received the stone in working condition from the shop of opposite party at Ludhiana for the amount of Rs. 2132/- but the complainant has paid only Rs. 1500/- and the remaining amount of Rs. 632/- has not been paid. It is also alleged that there was no defect in the said stone nor the said stone was supplied at village Ganduan Kalan as alleged by the complainant and thus from the aforesaid facts it stands proved that the complainant has purchased one pair of stone for Rs. 2132/- vide retail invoice /cash Ex C-1 dt.7/7/06. The complainant has specifically alleged in the complaint as well as in his affidavit Ex C1/A that the guarantee period of the said stone was one year and that the said stone was supplied to him at village Gandhuan Kalan where he runs Atta Chakki and the said stone has become out of order and defective after six months as the stone was not of good quality and small part of concrete in the shape of sand used to be mixed in the flour/atta and the clients  used to return the said flour/atta. The opposite party has taken the plea that the complainant has paid Rs. 1500/- only out of Rs. 2132/- but this contention of the opposite party stands contradictory and belied by the contents of the bill Ex C-1 wherein it is mentioned that the said transaction for sale of one pair of stone is of cash amount. Furthermore the opposite party has not filed any suit for the recovery of the remaining amount of Rs. 632/- as alleged in the written statement in any court. Therefore, it seems that the opposite party has taken false allegation that the stone was not supplied to the complainant at village Gandhuan Kalan. Furthermore in the bill Ex C-1 the address of the complainant is mentioned as village Gandhuan Kalan. District Fatehgarh Sahib and the said stone was to be used at Gandhuan Kalan and thus the defect has arisen in the stone at village Gandhuan Kalan which falls within the territorial jurisdiction of Fatehgarh Sahib and thus there is part of cause of action has arisen to the complainant at village Gandhuan Kalan which is within the jurisdiction of District Fatehgarh Sahib and thus this Forum has jurisdiction. Therefore, non replacement of the one pair of new stone instead of defective stone is matter of deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party.<br />  7)                For the foregoing reasons and discussion, we accept the complaint and direct the opposite party to make the payment of Rs. 2132/- with interest at the rate of 9% from the date of filing of the complaint i.e 8/8/07 till its realization. For mental agony and harassment the complainant is entitled to Rs. 2000/- as compensation and Rs. 500/- as cost of the complaint.<br />  8)                Copy of the order be sent to the parties free of cost and thereafter file be consigned to the record room.<br />  <br /> Announced: 4/2/08<br /> <br /> Gurdev Singh<br /> President <br /> District Consumer Forum<br /> Fatehgarh Sahib<br /> <br /> <br /> Veena Chahal<br /> Member<br /> <br /> Sher Singh Sidhu<br /> Member <br />  <br />                                                                                       <br />  <br />  <br />  <br />  <br /> <br />