Haryana

Sonipat

CC/92/2015

SURENDER MALIK S/O BALKISHAN - Complainant(s)

Versus

SAS ENGINEERING - Opp.Party(s)

MAMTA

18 Mar 2015

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,

SONEPAT.       

 

                                Complaint No.92 of 2015

                                Instituted on:18.03.2015                                             Date of order:03.07.2015

 

Surender Malik son of Bal Kishan, resident of Vishal Nagar, Gali no.5, Sonepat.

..Complainant

 

                            Versus

 

SAS Engineering, NO.4,7, Vijay Complex, Arimalan Road, Pudukkottai,Tamilnadu.

..Respondent.

 

COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 12 OF       

THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,1986

 

Argued by: Ms. Mamta, Advocate for complainant.

          Respondent ex-parte.

 

BEFORE     NAGENDER SINGH, PRESIDENT.

          PRABHA WATI, MEMBER.

          D.V. RATHI, MEMBER.

 

O R D E R

 

          Complainant has filed the present complaint against the respondent alleging therein that he has purchased semi automatic paper cup machine on 20.3.2014 for Rs.6,80,000/- from the respondent.  But after use, the said machine started off automatically and there are some problem in electric parts of the said machine.  The complainant contacted the respondent to remove the fault but of no use and due to this, the complainant has suffered unnecessary mental agony, harassment and business of the complainant has also been effected.  The complainant served the respondent with legal notice but of no use and that amounts to a grave deficiency in service on the part of the respondent. So, he has come to this Forum and has filed the present complaint.

2.        Notice to the respondent was issued through registered post.  But when none appeared on behalf of the respondent, the respondent was proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 23.04.2015.

3.        We have heard the ex-parte arguments advanced by the ld. Counsel for the complainant and we have also gone through the entire relevant material available on the case file carefully & minutely.

4.        Ld. Counsel for the complainant has argued that the respondent has supplied the defective machine which is having manufacturing defect.  As and when the complainant made the complaint, the respondent put off the matter on one pretext or the other and due to this, the complainant has suffered unnecessary mental agony, harassment and business of the complainant has also been effected.  The complainant served the respondent with legal notice but of no use and that amounts to a grave deficiency in service on the part of the respondent.

          The complainant has placed on record some documents i.e. Affidavit Ex.CW1 and documents Annexure 1 to 9.

          The bare perusal of the complaint, affidavit and annexures, it is proved that the complainant has purchased semi automatic paper cup machine on 20.3.2014 for Rs.6,80,000/- from the respondent.  Annexure 9 is photo copy of e-mail sent by the complainant to the respondents. The contents of the e-mail are as under:-

          “Please send my pending cup mould of 100 ml and your service engineer for machine. Machine not working properly last 3 months. Pls send your service engineer as soon as possible”.

          The bare perusal of these documents and e-mail shows that the service was not provided properly by the respondent to the complainant.

          The complainant by way of present complaint has sought the relief to direct the respondent to pay Rs.5 lacs for mental agony, harassment, Rs.6,80,000/- as cost of the machine and Rs.5500/- as costs of present complaint.

          But the complainant has failed to produce any technical report to show that the machine is question was having any technical defect which was unrepairable.  In the absence of the technical report, the cost of machine to the tune of Rs.6,80,000/- cannot be refunded to the complainant. 

          In the present case, the respondent has been proceeded against ex-parte. Accordingly, we hereby direct the respondent to provide proper service to the complainant and within a period of one month, make the machine of the complainant into working order.  Since the respondent has not appeared before this Forum by considering themselves above the law, we hereby direct the respondent to compensate the complainant to the tune of Rs.10,000/- (Rs.ten thousands) for rendering deficient services, for causing unnecessary mental agony, harassment and under the head of litigation expenses.

          With these observations, findings and directions, the present complaint stands allowed partly ex-parte.

          Certified copy of this order be provided to the complainant free of cost and the same be also sent to the respondent for information and its strict compliance.

File be consigned to the record-room.

 

 

(Prabha Wati)        (DV Rathi)                 (Nagender Singh-President)

Member DCDRF        Member DCDRF                   DCDRF, Sonepat.

 

Announced:03.07.2015