Smt. Sanjukta Panda filed a consumer case on 06 Jul 2022 against Propreitor of M/S Arun Engineering Works, in the Sambalpur Consumer Court. The case no is CC/24/2019 and the judgment uploaded on 06 Jul 2022.
PRESIDENT, DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SAMBALPUR
Consumer Case No- 24/2019
Present-Dr. Ramakanta Satapathy, President,
Sri. Sadananda Tripathy, Member,
Smt. Sanjukta Panda,
W/O- Sri. Ramesh Chandra Panda
R/O-Ainthapali, Nr. DIET, PO-Budharaja, PS-Ainthapali
Dist-Sambalpur and Proprietor of M/S. Anu Bricks Works. …..Complainant
Vrs.
Proprietor of M/S Arun Engineering Works,
Vasantdada Industrial Estate,
Plot No. 32, Chaitanya Nagar,
Dist-Sangli, Maharashtra. ….Opp. Party
Counsels:-
DATE OF HEARING : 31.05.2022, DATE OF JUDGEMENT : 06.07.2022
Presented by Dr. Ramakanta Satapathy, PRESIDENT,
The machinery was installed on 29.04.2018 but on 16.05.2018 the lower jack broke causing bending of jack rod, nuts etc. hence complaint was made, the O.P. repaired the same and disclosed the manufacturing defect.
In June 2018 the middle plate of the machine got bend and on complaint the O.P. assured to send the technician but after four months sent the technician and repaired/replaced the same. During that period the Complainant sustained heavy loss due to non running of the machine.
On 30.10.2018, the upper main jack of the machine broke and after two months, the same was repaired by the O.P. The Complainant complained to replace the whole machinery with new one but the O.P. assured that no problem will arise.
On 07.01.2019 when the main forma side of the machine broke and complaint was made, the O.P. demanded Rs. 15,000/- to the Complainant, so that the O.P. will send the defective parts and technician for replacement.
The Complainant deposited Rs. 15,000/- in the account of the O.P. as per his instruction but dispatched the machine part on 13.12.2019 having without any technician. On repeated request, the O.P. deputed one local technician namely Dillip, who visited the site and replaced the part.
Again on 12.12.2018 and 26.03.2019 six numbers of nut holding the main jack broke, complaint made but the O.P. requested to contact Dillip. Dillip inspected the machinery and replaced the nuts at the cost of Complainant. Dillip opined that as the machinery is having manufacturing defect, this type of problem will persist in future. The matter was reported to the O.P. but the O.P. did not take any action. Since 26.03.2019 the unit totally stopped working. The Complainant had placed order of a fully automatic machine but the O.P. supplied a semi automatic machine.
The Complainant sent a pleader notice on 09.04.2019, when no any action was taken by the O.P. which was received on 15.04.2019 by the O.P. but the O.P. did not respond nor replaced the defective unit nor refunded the amount.
The Complainant is overburden with loan obtained form PNB, Sambalpur.
The Complainant placed the order for fully automatic machine but it is alleged that the machine is semi-automatic. The invoice supplied to the O.P. clearly reflects that the machine is fully automatic. Regarding specification of machine the Complainant not raised any question except in the pleader notice, nor any technical report of the expert has been submitted. From Project report it reveals that the calculation are relating to semi-automatic machine. The project report is signed by the O.P. The situation clearly reflects the negative attitude of the O.P. for promotion of its business.
The O.P. is totally silent on the complaints made. From the documents filed by the Complainant it reveals that the unit is non-functional since 26.03.2019 and within the period of guarantee.
The Complainant availed loan of Rs. 23,75,050/- with 9.7% interest and the repayment period was 60 months. Due to deficiency in service of the O.P. the unit is non-functional since 26.03.2019 and the O.P. is liable for the damages. From repeated repairing of the machinaries it can be concluded that the machinaries are defective one.
Accordingly it is ordered:-
ORDER
The O.P. is deficient in service and for defective machinaries the unit became non-functional. The O.P. is directed to replace the whole machineries of the unit with new one as per invoice No. 003 dated 15.04.2018 within one month from the day of receipt of this order. In case of non compliance the O.P. shall be liable to pay 9.7% interest per annum against the purchased value of the machinery i.e. Rs. 17,75,074/- w.e.f. 26.03.2019, when the whole unit became non-functional.
Towards damages the O.P. is liable to pay the estimated net earning of the Complainant as per project report w.e.f. 26.03.2019 till installation of the new machineries or payment of the aforesaid dues to the Complainant.
The O.P. is liable to pay Rs. 10,000/- litigation expenses to the Complainant.
Order pronounced in open court on this 6th day of July 2022.
Supply free copies to the parties.
Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes
Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.