O R D E R R.Vijayakumar, member. The Complaint is filed for refund of price of wood cutting machine Rs.29812.50/- conveyance charge Rs.3750/- and compensation Rs.10000/-. The complainant’s case is that the wood cutting machine purchased from opposite party on 15/02/09 for the price of Rs.29812/- became defective and it was not rectified by the opposite parties. When the complainant took the chain petro sano (home lite) cutting machine to his work place and operated it did not work. The complainant took the machine again to the opposite parties repaired and took back to his work place and operated it was failed again. The same being was happened 5 times within the shot span of 15 days. When the complainant again reported the defect, opposite party did not even bothered to answer. (2) The defect continues and the complainant failed in his attempt to use the machine for the production of furniture. The act of opposite party amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. Hence the complaint. The opposite party filed version contenting that the complaint is not maintainable either in law or on facts. After purchase of the said wood cutting machine, the complainant approached opposite party only one time with the machine for rectifying the defective ignition switch. The switch was replaced and the function was convinced. After this the complainant never approached the opposite parties. The complainant through telephone demanded the opposite party to take the machine after paying the entire cost of machine. The opposite party informed that he is ready to rectify the defects. The complainant never cared to produce the machine before OP. The complaint is to be dismissed. As per application filed by the complainant, an expert was appointed and after inspection in the presence of both parties the expert has submitted the report. The complainant filed affidavit. PW1 examined. Exhibits P1 to P5 and C1 marked. OP and counsel remained absent continuously. No representation. Hence set exparte. (3) As the opposite party remained absent we are constrained to relay upon the evidence adduced by the complainant. The points that would arise for consideration are - Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of opposite party.
- Compensation and cost.
Points 1 & 2 We have perused all the documents in detail. It is clearly stated in Ext: C1 that there is manufacturing defect in the machine and the machine is not functioning due to that defect. C1 was not challenged by both parties. On perusal of the documents, we find that there is unfair trade practice and deficiency in service on the part of opposite party. The points found accordingly. In the result the complainant is allowed. The opposite party is directed to refund the price of machine Rs.29812.50/- to the complainant and to take back the defective wood cutting machine. The opposite party is further directed to pay conveyance charge Rs.3750/- and compensation Rs.10000/- to the complainant. The order is to be complied with within one month of the date of receipt of order. Dated this the 13th day of May 2010. K.Vijayakumaran:Sd/- Adv.Ravi Susha :Sd/- R.Vijayakumar :Sd/- / / Forwarded by Order / / Senior Superintendent (4) INDEX List of witness for the complainant: PW1 - Chandran Pillai List of documents for complainant: P1 - Receipt P2 - Brochure P3 - Advocate notice P4 - Postal receipt P5 - Acknowledgement card C1 - Commissionarate report | 
