Date of Filing:17.07.2009<br /> Date of Order: 23.12.2009<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> BEFORE THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM SESHADRIPURAM BANGALORE-20<br /> <br /> Dated: 23rd DAY OF DECEMBER 2009<br /> <br /> PRESENT<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Sri S.S. NAGARALE, B.A, LL.B. (SPL.), President.<br /> Sri BALAKRISHNA. V. MASALI, B.A, LL.B. (SPL.), Member.<br /> <br /> COMPLAINT NO:1684 OF 2009<br /> <br /> Anand,<br /> Door No., 603, Sathyammana Kunte,<br /> Konanakunte Cross,<br /> Vasanthapura Road,<br /> Bangalore – 560 062.<br /> Complainant<br /> V/S<br /> M/s Harish Trading and Engineering,<br /> Gubbalala Gate, Kanakapura Main Road,<br /> Next to Petrol Bunk,<br /> Bangalore – 560 062.<br /> Opposite Party<br /> <br /> ORDER<br /> By the President Sri. S.S. Nagarale<br /> <br /> This complaint is filed against Opposite Party M/s Harish Trading and Engineering requesting for grant of compensation of Rs.20,000/-.<br /> 2. The case of the complainant is that, he had purchased the motor five years back from the above said company and since the motor was not working, he took the said motor to the above said company for repairs. He has paid an amount of Rs.5,500/- for the repairs to the motor. He has further sated that the Opposite Party has not repaired the motor and simply returned the motor and reinstalled the same to the bore-well of the complainant. Though the motor was running but it was not lifting the water and as such the complainant was compelled to purchase the water from outside by paying Rs.250/- per load. He has been put to great hardship and also mental loss and therefore he has prayed for a compensation of Rs.20,000/-. In support of the complaint, he has filed his affidavit and also produced the bill dated 22/04/2009 from Harish Trading and Engineering. In which it has been mentioned that the motor rewinding, oil seal, rings, bearings, and etc., and an amount of Rs.4,500/- has been shown in the bill.<br /> 3. The notice was served to the Opposite Party and he appeared and filed his version. In his version, he has stated that the complainant has given the motor for repairs and as agreed he has repaired the motor by rewinding and etc. and thereafter has he informed that the pump has clearly worn out and there is no use of pump. Further the Opposite Party had advised him to change the pump since it has worked about five years and if it is repaired the cost may be around 11,000/- and he has also advised that if the spare parts are assembled to the bore-well it may cost about 7,500/-, but the complainant has not agreed for the same and he asked to repair only the motor. Accordingly he has repaired the motor and installed the same to the bore-well. After the repairs, the motor was running in good condition, but the pump which was old one was not lifting the water from the bore-well and this fact has been clearly explained to the complainant by the Opposite Party. He has also stated that he advised the complainant to verify in the market and get new pumps, but he had not cared to it and filed a false complaint to harass the Opposite Party and to damage his reputation. He has also stated that there is no manufacturing defect and the motor is out of warranty period since it is five years old and during the five years period, the motor has worked very well as such there is no complaint during the said period and he has stated that he has only repaired the motor and not the pump and therefore he has prayed for dismissal of the complaint. <br /> 4. We have heard the arguments on both side. <br /> 5. On perusal of the records and after hearing the arguments, it is found that the complainant has not filed anything to prove the deficiency of service on the part of Opposite Party. He has also not filed any technical opinion to show that the motor was not repaired properly. We have also tried to settle the matter amicably. Though the Opposite Party was ready to do repair of the pump also at some reasonable cost, but the complainant was not agreed for the same and he was not ready for the said proposal.<br /> 6. The complainant has approached this forum for relief. The burden to prove the allegation is on him. The complainant is stating that the motor in question is not in working condition and the Opposite Party has not repaired the same through he has taken the amount. As against this, it is the case of the Opposite Party that he has repaired it and has done his bob. Under these circumstances the burden to prove the allegation shifts on the complainants. But the complainant has not produced any kind of legal and acceptable evidence to prove his case. Therefore natural consequence would be that the complainant is not entitled to any relief from the hands of this Forum. However, the complainant will be at liberty to approach the Competent Civil Court and produce all the necessary documents to prove his case to get the relief there. Therefore, in view of lack of evidence, the complaint is deserves to be dismissed. In the result, we proceed to pass the following:- <br /> ORDER<br /> 2. The complaint is dismissed with liberty to the complainant to approach the Civil Court.<br /> 3. Send the copy of this Order to both the parties free of costs immediately. <br /> 4. Pronounced in the Open Forum on this 23rd DAY OF DECEMBER 2009. <br /> Order accordingly,<br /> <br /> <br /> PRESIDENT<br /> <br /> I concur the above findings.<br /> <br /> <br /> MEMBER<br /> <br />