CC/62/2022

ORDRE NO.14

DATED:31.03.2023

Today is fixed for order.

Ld. Adv. for the complainant is present.

 Ld. Adv. for the OP is present.

Petition dated 11.10.2022 is taken up for order.

Perused the petition.

OP by filing the said petition stated that the instant case is not maintainable.

He alleged in the petition that complainant has no cause of action. OP is a private limited company and distributes products. On 05.08.2019 complainant has approached the OP for purchasing of latest single cassette reader the carestream VITA Flex 45 pph CR system. After understanding the terms and conditions complainant placed the order on 06.08.2019. An agreement was executed in between complainant and OP. On 30.08.2019 OP generated two invoices. He also generated another invoices on 14.11.2019. Equipment was successfully installed at Beauty Pathology Centre, Hospital Road, Tehatta, Nadia with full satisfaction of the complainant. Thereafter complainant made several service requests and OP attended the same with proper job sheet. On 10.07.2021 complainant indicated a problem and in response to the service call Service Engineer attended the Beauty Pathology Centre and after diagnosis it is found that 14*17 image play has some scratch mark and broken mark, after all the system is Ok. But it is not manufacturing defect. Instalment cheque was bounced. He prayed for dismissal of the complaint as not maintainable. Perused the annexure attached with the said petition.

          I have carefully gone through the petition of the complaint wherein it has been alleged that the complainant purchased pathological equipment machine from the OP with the cost of Rs.6,35,164/- and paid some amount in favour of the OP. He further stated that after payment of several instalments it was found that the said machines were not working properly and the service engineer who visited and inspected the machine noted down that the machine be replaced. Perused the annexure attached with the petition of complaint.

          On careful perusal of pleadings of both the parties, it is admitted fact that complainant purchased the equipments from the OP on 06.08.2019, but said machines were not functioning properly as such complainant made calls on different dates. Engineer of the OP visited the house of complainant on several occasions but ultimately defects of equipment have not solved. As per report of the Engineer problems of the equipments are still pending.

          Having regard to the aforesaid discussion, we are of the firm view that OP failed to assign proper reasons in support of the fact that present case not maintainable. On the other hand, we find that complainant is not getting satisfactory service from the aforesaid equipments which he purchased from the OP. In this situation, we think that it is a fit case which should be disposed off by taking evidence. We do not find any ground to dismiss the case as not maintainable.

          Accordingly, we find that the petition dated 11.10.2022 filed by the OP is devoid of merits.

          Hence,

                             It is

                                                          Order

                                                                             that the petition dated 11.10.2022 filed by the OP is dismissed on contest but without any order as to costs.