Before the President District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Kandhamal, Phulbani
C.C. No. 10 / 2020
Present: Miss Sudhiralaxmi Pattnaik - President i/c
Sri Purnachandra Tripathy - Member.
Sri Anil kumar Sahoo, aged about 39 years
S.O: Surendra Sahoo, At : Tumudibandha,
PO/PS : Tumudibandha, Dist: Kandhamal. ………………. Complainant
Versus
- Proprietor, HANJE HYDROTECH
Plot No.2, Gate No.34,
Sanjay Industrial Estate Co. Op
Society Madhvnagar, Sangli
Maharastra, PIN¨416406
2. Durga Madhab Padhi, aged about 27 years
Son of Suresh padhi
ESI Colony, Hirakud
Sambalpur, PIN-768016 ………………. Opposite Party.
For the Complainant: Sri Manoj Kumar Sahoo, Advocate, Phulbani
For the Opp. Pary no.1: Self
For the opp.partyno.2: set-exparte
Date of order: 21-01-2020
The case of the complainant is that he had visited the social media site (You tube) to know about the fly-ash brick machine and from the link the complainant got the contract details of OP No. 1 from whom he came to know that, the OP No. 2, who is the Odisha marketing head under the OP No. 1, who visited the different areas of Odisha state for promoting the product of OP No. 1 as well as installed the machines. Thereafter OP No. 2 visited to the complainant at his address and described the features of the machine along-with the price and condition of payment. The complainant agreed with the OP No. 2 and paid Rs. 3,50,000/- in advance through NEFT and there was an understanding to pay the remaining amount in 36 installments each EMI is Rs. 16,131/-. On dated 20.05.2020 the complainant had purchased the fly-ash brick machine and executed a lease agreement with the OP No. 1, where the price of fly-ash brick machine was Rs. 7,77,000/-, advance amount of Rs. 3,50,000/- and the remaining amount of Rs. 5,80,720/- will be paid in 36 EMI from 20/05/2020 to 20/05/2023. After received the advance amount paid by the complainant on dated 28/06/2020 the fly-ash brick machine was installed by the OP No. 2 who demonstrated the operation of the machine in presence of the complainant. After installation of the machine the complainant started the production of brick but the machine did not functioned properly for which the complainant instantly contacted the OP No. 2 and narrated the defects of the machine. Upon such complain of the complainant the OP No. 2 assured the complainant for early rectification of the defects but did not turn to the complainant. Thereafter the complainant made contact with OP No. 1 and narrated the details of the defects over phone but neither the OP No. 1 nor the OP No. 2 had taken any steps for rectification of the defects of the machine. On dated 23/09/2020 the complainant sent his grievance through e-mail to the OP No. 1 with an approach for early rectification and later hard copy of the grievance sent through registered post even if that the OP No. 1 did not take any steps. As a result of which the manufacturing of bricks was severely affected for which the complainant is suffering serious financial loss as well mental harassment. On the other hand without taking any steps for rectification of the defects of the machine, with an ill intention and oblique motive, ops presented a cheque No. 484036 dated 24.08.2020 amounting Rs. 16,131/- for encashment, though all the facts and circumstances well acknowledged to the OP No. 1 prior to the date of presentation of the Cheque. The above act of the OPs compel the complainant to approach this commission. Accordingly the case of the complainant was admitted, notices were issued to the OPs for their appearance and filing version. The notices were properly served upon the OPs and the OP No. 1 sent the written version through registered post but op no.2 did not appeared.hence he was set ex-parte on dt.09.12.2020. The OP No. 1 clearly stated that the version is a compromise application with certain conditions and on the other hand on dated 02/12/2020 the OP No. 1 issued a credit note as acknowledgement against the machine return back from the complainant, subsequently on the same day the OP No. 2 sent the advance money of Rs. 3,50,000/- in shape of cheque of Axis Bank, Sambalpur Branch through Whatsapp of the complainant with assurance that the original cheque will be sent soon. On dated 23/12/2020 the complainant filed the evidence in shape of affidavit along with the photocopy of credit note and the cheque. At the time of argument the OPs did not appear to put forth their stand in support of the case. The Ld. advocate of the complainant was present on the hearing and vehemently objected the OPs act and conduct, also stated that the OPs have deceived the complainant in all possible way with an intention to cheat the complainant since the day of traction.
We peruse the case record and the documents placed by the Ld. counsel for the complainant and gone through the evidence affidavit of the Complainant, heard the Ld. counsel for the complainant after the careful examination of the entire evidence available on record, we found that the complainant had purchased a fly-ash brick machine vide Tax invoice no. 270351101776 dated 18/06/2020 of Rs. 3,50,000/- and executed lease agreement between the parties for payment of remaining amount in 36 EMI, it is also revealed from the e-way bill that the above machine was transported to the complainant at Tumudibandha on dated 18/06/2020 on payment of Rs. 35,000/- towards transport charge through the bank account of OP No. 1, it is clearly established from the version of the O.P No.1 in para – 8, the OP clearly mentioned that the rubber part of coupling of fly ash machine was damaged and the OP severally requested the complainant to return the fly ash brick machine and further the OP No. 1 agreed to compromise the matter. Accordingly the opno.1 took back the defective machine from the complainant and to that effect op no.1 issued a credit note on 02.12.2020 in favour of the complainant and the OP No. 2 also issued a cheque bearing no. 078204 dated 01/12/2020 of Rs. 3,50,000/- of Axis Bank Ltd, Samabalpur Branch in favour of the complainant through his whattsapp. From the averments facts and circumstances it is well proved that there is a gross deficiency in service on the part of the OPs towards the complainant and for which the complainant suffer mental agony as well as financial loss. Hence order.
O R D E R
The complaint case is allowed against the O.P. No- 1 & 2 and they are jointly and severally liable for the deficiency of service towards the complainant, hence they are directed to refund the advance amount of Rs. 3,50,000/- along with 9 % interest from the date of purchase to till the date of payment, apart from that, O.P. No- 1 & 2 are hereby directed to pay Rs. 20,000/- towards compensation for mental agony and Rs. 15,000/- for litigation cost within 45 days from the date of receipt of this order, in the event of non-compliance of this order the awarded amount shall carry interest @ 18 % per annum. Accordingly the C.C. is disposed off, free copy of this order be supplied to the parties.
Order pronounced in the open Court today i.e. 21st January 2021
Member President
