Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

CC/362/2016

Syed Sha Saifuddin - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s.Mukunda Foods Pvt Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

Swaminathan, T.Hemalatha

27 Sep 2018

ORDER

                                                                        Date of Filing :  18.08.2016

                                                                        Date of Order :  27.09.2018

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (SOUTH)

  @   2^nd Floor, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C. Nagar, Park Town, Chennai-3.

PRESENT: THIRU. M.MONY, B.Sc., L.L.B., M.L.                     : PRESIDENT            

                  TMT. K.AMALA, M.A., L.L.B.                                 : MEMBER I

C.C. No.362/2016

DATED THIS THURSDAY THIS 27^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2018

 

Mr. Syed Sha Saifuddin,

S/o.  Mr. Syed Sha Shujauddin,

Proprietor,

M/s. Bites and Sips,

No.69, Ellis Road,

Annai Salai,

Chennai – 600 002.                                                        .. Complainant

                                                       ..Versus..

 

M/s. Mukunda Foods Pvt. Ltd.,

Rep. by its C.E.O. and Co-Founder

Mr. Eashwar,

No.545/15, Opposite to ICICI Bank,

(Near SRS Travels),

Bommanahalli,

Bangalore – 560 068.                                                .. Opposite party.

 

Counsel for the Complainant      :  M/s. Swaminathan Law Associates

Counsel for the Opposite party  :  Exparte

 

ORDER

THIRU. M. MONY, PRESIDENT

This complaint has been filed by the complainant against the opposite party under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 seeking to refund a sum of Rs.1,37,640/- together with 24% interest and to pay a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- towards compensation for unfair trade practices and a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- towards compensation for insurmountable mental agony, hardship and depression suffered by the complainant and his family due to the false claim raised by the opposite parties with cost of Rs.25,000/- to the complainant.

1.        The averment of the complaint in brief are as follows:

The complainant submits that he has purchased an Automatic Dosa Making Machine i.e. “Dosamatic” for his business on payment of Rs.1,37,640/- through RTGS on 28.01.2016 and the said machine is delivered on by the opposite party on 15.02.2016.   The complainant   submits that the opposite party’s men inspected the premises for due installation and suggested electrical modifications/ wiring etc and was approved by one Mr. Rahul on 04.06.2016.  The complainant submits that right from the installation of Dosamatic machine, it never worked or produced dosa as advertised or assured by the opposite party.  On the other hand, it created lot of problems like over heating, electrical shock etc.   The complainant also made several complaints to the opposite party and even travelled to Bangalore repeatedly to get rectification of the machine or replacement of the machine.  But day by day the working condition of the machine is very poor.  Thereby, the complainant sustained severe financial loss, declined of business reputation, mental agony etc. Hence the complainant issued legal notice dated:25.06.2016 to the opposite party. The opposite party has given an evasive reply dated:09.07.2016 but not come forward to settle the claim.   The complainant submits that he carried out all the instruction of the opposite party and the Dosamatic machine was installed by the opposite party on 07.07.2016 by the technician.  Due training also given to the complainant’s operators by the opposite party’s engineer till 10.07.2016 for four days.   The complainant submits that the machine was not working from 12.07.2016 itself. There shall be no electrical fault because all the installations were carried out by the opposite party’s technician.  The complainant  submits that the opposite party has supplied only defective machine and its Engineers manipulated and readjusted the faulty Dosamatic machine according to their technical knowledge.   The act of the opposite party caused great mental agony.  Hence the complaint is filed.

2.     Inspite of receipt of notice, the opposite party did not appear before this Forum and therefore, the opposite party was set Exparte.  

3.     Though the opposite party remained Exparte, this Forum is to dispose this compliant fully on merits with available materials before this Forum. 

4.     In such circumstances, in order to prove the allegations made in the complaint the proof affidavit is filed by the complainant as his evidence, and also documents Ex.A1 to  Ex.A5  are marked. 

5.      The points for consideration is:-

1. Whether the complainant is entitled to get refund of a sum of Rs.1,37,640/- paid towards the cost of Automatic Dosa Making Machine with interest at the rate of 24% p.a. as prayed for?

 

2. Whether the complainant is entitled to a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- towards compensation for unfair trade practice  and another sum of Rs.1,00,000/-  towards compensation for mental agony, hardship and depression with cost of Rs.25,000/- as prayed for?

6.      On point:-

The opposite party remained Exparte.  The complainant filed his written arguments.  Perused the records namely the complaint, proof affidavit of complainant, documents etc.   The complainant pleaded and contended that he has purchased an Automatic Dosa Making Machine i.e. “Dosamatic” for his business on payment of Rs.1,37,640/- through RTGS on 28.01.2016 as per Ex.A1  and the said machine is delivered by the opposite party on 15.02.2016.   The opposite party issued Ex.A2, Invoice.   The complainant further pleaded and contended that the opposite party’s men inspected the premises for due installation and suggested electrical modifications/ wiring etc and was approved by one Mr. Rahul on 04.06.2016.  Further the contention of the complainant is that right from the installation of Dosamatic machine, it never worked or produced dosa as advertised or assured by the opposite party.  On other hand, it created lot of problems like over heating, electrical shock etc.   The complainant also made several complaints to the opposite party and even travelled to Bangalore repeatedly to get rectification of the machine or replacement of the machine.  But day by day the  service and working condition of the machine is very poor.  Thereby, the complainant sustained severe financial loss, declined of business reputation, mental agony etc.   

7.     Further the contention of the complainant is that he carried out all the instruction of the opposite party and the Dosamatic machine was installed by the opposite party on 07.07.2016 by the technician.  Due training also given to the complainant’s operators by the opposite party’s engineer till 10.07.2016   for four days.   Further the contention of the complainant is that the machine was not working from 12.07.2016 itself. There shall be no electrical fault because all the installations carried out by the opposite party’s technician.  The contentions raised by the opposite party in its reply notice are false and are against true facts.   The complainant further contended that the opposite party has supplied only defective machine and its Engineers manipulated and readjusted the faulty Dosamatic machine according to their technical knowledge.  If the fault cannot be rectified or repaired, it should be replaced.  But the complainant has not produced any expert evidence to prove such contention.  However, the opposite party has not appeared before this Forum to disprove the contentions of the complainant and remained Exparte.  Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Forum is of the considered view that the opposite party shall  refund a sum of Rs.1,37,640/- being the cost of the Dosamatic machine with interest at the rate of 9% p.a. and a compensation of Rs.30,000/- with cost of Rs.5,000/-.

In the result, this complaint is allowed in part.  The opposite party is directed to refund a sum of Rs.1,37,640/- (Rupees One lakh thirty seven thousand six hundred and forty only) being the cost price of the ‘Dosamatic’ machine with interest at the rate of 9% p.a. from the date of complaint i.e. 18.08.2016 to till the date of this order and to pay a sum of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty thousand only) towards compensation for mental agony with cost of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand only) to the complainant.

The above amounts shall be payable within six weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order, failing which, the said amounts shall carry interest at the rate of 9% p.a. to till the date of payment.

Dictated  by the President to the Steno-typist, taken down, transcribed and computerized by her, corrected by the President and pronounced by us in the open Forum on this the 27^th day of September 2018. 

 

 

MEMBER –I                                                                      PRESIDENT

 

COMPLAINANT SIDE DOCUMENTS:

Ex.A1	28.01.2016	Copy of RTGS payment
Ex.A2	29.01.2016	Copy of invoice
Ex.A3	05.02.2016	Copy of consignment
Ex.A4	25.06.2016	Copy of legal notice from the complainant
Ex.A5	09.07.2016	Copy of reply notice from the opposite party

 

 

 

MEMBER –I                                                                      PRESIDENT