Date of filing: 25/02/2021
Date of Judgment: 27/01/2023
Mrs. Sashi Kala Basu, Hon’ble President.
This complaint is filed by Smt. Sonali Adak under section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 against opposite party (referred as O.P. hereinafter) namely M/s. Swapna Puran represented by its proprietor Sri Pintu Chakraborty alleging unfair trade practice and deficiency in service on the part of the O.P.
The case of the complainant in short is that by an agreement dated 24/08/2019 O.P. agreed to sale two machines one is Agarbatti Manual Machine at cost of Rs. 35,000/- and another Plastic Moulding Hand Machine at the cost of Rs. 30,000/-. Complainant also paid Rs. 5,000/- towards installation of the two machines. O.P. assured and promised the complainant in the agreement that he will supply raw materials for manufacturing agarbatti as per working performance of the complainant and agreed to compensate money if the production is hampered for the 1st 365 days. Being insisted by the employee of the O.P., complainant purchased Plastic Moulding Hand Machine in addition to Agarbatti Manual Machine as she was told that it was easy to run and to earn more by using the Plastic Moulding Hand Machine. She was assured that she could easily earn Rs. 30,000/- and Rs. 45,000/- in a month from those respective machines. Thereafter being trained, complainant started to operate both the machines but felt difficulty to operate Plastic Moulding Hand Machine as it was not suitable for her physique. So on the written request of the complainant for supply of another Agarbatti Manual Machine in place of Plastic Moulding Hand Machine, Plastic Moulding Hand Machine was taken back by the opposite party. But it has not been replaced by another Agarbatti Manual Machine. The O.P. also did not supply the raw materials as promised to manufacture agarbatti. Complainant has taken a room on rent to install the machine and has been paying monthly rent of Rs. 3,000/-. Those machines were purchased by her for earning money for her livelihood. But since the raw material was not supplied sufficiently so the production was hampered. Complainant had approached Consumer Grievance Cell and thereafter filed the present complaint as the matter could not be resolved by the grievance cell. By filing instant complaint, complainant has prayed for directing the opposite party to refund sum of Rs. 70,000/- with interest @ 8% p.a. and to take back Agarbatti Manual Machine, to pay rent of Rs. 18,000/- for the period from September, 2019 to February, 2020, to pay Rs. 2,00,000/- as compensation for harassment and Rs. 50,000/- as litigation cost.
On perusal of the record it appears notice was sent but in spite of its service as no step was taken by the O.P. and neither any written version filed, the case has been heard exparte.
So the only point requires determination is whether the complainant is entitled to the relief as prayed for?
DECISION WITH REASONS
In order to substantiate her claim that she purchased two machines, complainant has filed two invoices wherefrom it appears that Agarbatti Manual Machine was purchased on payment of price of Rs. 35,000/- and Plastic Moulding Hand Machine at a cost of Rs. 30,000/- from O.P. The agreement entered into between the party is also filed and as per the terms of the said agreement dated 24/08/2019 it was agreed that the seller would deliver the work order and supply the raw materials to purchaser as per the working performance of the purchaser. It was also agreed that the service for the maintenance of the machine will be provided within 72 hours from the time of complaint registered. The O.P. also agreed to pay compensation if any kind of production hampered or machine servicing related problems. A letter has been filed dated 26/09/2019 written by the complainant to the O.P. and acknowledgement therein indicates that the same was received by the O.P. On 27/09/2019 which suggests that the complainant had requested to replace the Plastic Moulding Hand Machine with the Agarbatti Manual Machine. The letter dated 24/12/2019 sent by the complainant to O.P. further indicates that she has agitated not supplying of the raw material properly for manufacturing agarbatti despite her several requests. It also suggest that the Plastic Moulding Hand Machine was already returned to the O.P. An acknowledgement or written commitment dated 21/01/2020 issued on behalf of the O.P. has also been filed by the complainant wherefrom it appears O.P. assured that they will hand over Agarbatti Manual Machine in place of Plastic Moulding Hand Machine on 15/02/2020 and it has also been acknowledged and promised that they would supply the raw materials for manufacturing agarbatti on 07/02/2020. From the said document it is very clear that the raw materials as promised before was not supplied by the O.P. to the complainant as well as the machine was not replaced. According to the complainant said written commitment dated 21/01/2020 was issued by one of the responsible officer of the O.P. when she went to the office of the O.P. Since before this commission there is absolutely no contrary material to counter and rebut the claim of the complainant, on consideration of the documents filed by the complainant especially written commitment dated 21/01/2020, we find complainant has established her case and thus entitled to refund of the sum paid by her towards Plastic Moulding Hand Machine i.e. Rs. 30,000/- and also entitled to compensation for harassment for not supplying of raw materials by the O.P. However we find no justification to direct the O.P. to refund the sum of Rs. 35,000/- for Agarbatti Manual Machine as the agreement filed by the complainant entered into between the parties is very categorical that the machine once sold cannot be taken back. Since Plastic Moulding Hand Machine has already been taken back by the O.P. and is with the O.P. complainant is entitled to the refund of the price of the said machine. Further we find no justification to direct about the payment of rent amount as prayed by the complainant as there was no such agreement. However we have already observed that she is entitled to compensation and thus an amount of Rs. 40,000/- will be justified as compensation.
Hence
ORDERED
CC/114/2021 is allowed exparte. Opposite party is directed to refund sum of Rs. 30,000/- to the complainant and further pay Rs. 40,000/- as compensation and Rs. 10,000/- as litigation cost within 60 days from this date in default of payment, entire sum shall carry interest @ 8% p.a. till realization.
