By Smt. C.S. Sulekha Beevi, President,<br /> <br /> <br /> 1. According to the complainant on 12-10-2004 he purchased textiles from opposite party shop for an amount of Rs.3510/-. Out of these two sarees each costing of Rs.452/- were defective, since their colour ran on the first use itself. Complainant approached opposite party for replacement. Opposite party issued receipt for return of sarees and later refused to refund or replace the sarees. Hence the complaint.<br /> <br /> <br /> 2. Opposite party filed version admitting purchase and return of the sarees. It is contended that the sarees were returned after using several times and that they were not washed according to the directions. Opposite party denies manufacturing defect and also contends that the complaint is bad for non-joinder of the manufacturer who is a necessary party. That complaint is liable to be dismissed.<br /> <br /> <br /> 3. Evidence in this case consists of affidavits filed by either sides. Exts.A1 and A2 marked on the side of complainant. No documents marked on the side of opposite party. Both sides have not adduced any oral evidence.<br /> <br /> <br /> 4. Points that arise for consideration are:<br /> (i) Is the complaint bad for non-joinder of manufacturer. <br /> (ii) Whether opposite party has committed any unfair trade practice. <br /> (iii) If so, reliefs and costs.<br /> <br /> <br /> 5. Point (i):- Opposite party contends that the complaint is bad for non-joinder of the manufacturer who is a necessary party. Complainant does not have any privity of contract with the manufacturer and therefore non-joinder of manufacturer as a party is not at all necessary. This point found in favour of complainant.<br /> <br /> <br /> 6. Point (ii):- The undisputed facts of this case is that complainant had purchased the sarees from opposite party and that he had returned the sarees alleging defect. Ext.A1 series are the two bills issued at the time of purchase. Ext.A2 is the receipt issued to complainant at the time of return of the sarees. Opposite party resists the claim affirming that the sarees have no defect. It is stated that after return of the sarees by the complainant they were shown to the distributor and wholesale dealer who reported that the sarees have no defect. Opposite party has refrained from producing the sarees before the Forum. For this reason we have no hesitation to draw adverse inference against opposite party. We find that the alleged sarees are defective and hold that the act of opposite party in selling a substandard item amounts to unfair trade practice.<br /> <br /> <br /> 7. In the result, we allow this complaint and order opposite party to pay a sum of Rs.904/- (Rupees Nine hundred and four only) to the complainant along with costs of Rs.250/- (Rupees two hundred and fifty only) within three weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Opposite party is at liberty to claim reimbursement from the manufacturer.<br /> <br /> <br /> Dated this 29th day of January, 2008.<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> C.S. SULEKHA BEEVI, PRESIDENT<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> K.T.SIDHIQ, MEMBER<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> APPENDIX<br /> <br /> <br /> Witness examined on the side of the complainant : Nil <br /> Documents marked on the side of the complainant : Ext.A1 and A2<br /> Ext.A1 series : Two bills dated, 12-10-2004 issued at the time of purchase.<br /> Ext.A2 : Receipt dated, 26-1-2005 issued by opposite party to<br /> complainant.<br /> Witness examined on the side of the opposite parties : Nil<br /> Documents marked on the side of the opposite parties : Nil<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> C.S. SULEKHA BEEVI, PRESIDENT<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> K.T.SIDHIQ, MEMBER<br />