DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, PALAKKAD
Dated this the 25th day of September, 2023
Present : Sri.Vinay Menon V., President
: Smt.Vidya A., Member
: Sri.Krishnankutty N.K., Member Date of filing: 17/02/2023
CC/50/2023
M.K.Salim,
S/o Kunju Pillai,
New Galaxy Metal,
Adakka Puthur, Vellinezhi,
Cherpulassery, - Complainant
Palakkad.
(By Adv. B.Ravikumar)
V/s
Sri. Smitto Thomas,
Managing Partner,
M/s Super Automotives & Engineering Works,
Kuruppampadi,
Pralaikadu, - Opposite party
Thuruthy P.O, Perumbavoor,
Ernamkulam District – 683 545.
(Ex-parte)
O R D E R
By Smt. Vidya.A, Member
1. Pleadings of the complainant in brief
Complainant is the owner on M/s New Galaxy Metal, Adakkaputhur, Palakkad and he is earning his livelihood from this shop. The opposite party is the managing partner of M/s Super Automotives of Engineering works which deals with the business of Storage Tanks, Diesel Pumps etc.
On 25/6/2021, the complainant purchased a Storage Tank with a capacity of 200 litres and a Diesel Pump with Flow Meter from the opposite party. The same was fitted in the complainant’s establishment. Later on, the complainant noticed that the Flow Meter was defective and it did not show the actual quantity of Diesel flown through the pump. Hence the complainant took the storage Tank and Diesel pump to the opposite parties shop twice for repair or replacement. On both these occasions, opposite party made him believe that the defect is rectified and returned it to him. But the opposite party had not done any repair in the Flow Meter and its problem persisted. The complainant took the Tank and pump to the opposite party’s shop which is about 150 kms. away in a pickup van paying high fare.
On 3rd week of November, the Tank and pump with Flow Meter was again taken to the opposite party for rectification for the 3rd time; but the opposite party has not rectified or replaced it. The Flow Meter is having manufacturing defect and the opposite party is bound to replace the entire unit or to return the purchase price with interest from the date of purchase along with the loss sustained to the complainant.
The complainant was put to serious physical sufferings and mental agony due to the acts of the opposite party and he is claiming an amount of Rs.1,25,000/- as compensation for the loss sustained due to the defects of the flow meter. Since he could not use the storage tank and Diesel pump, he lost his customers and sustained loss. An amount of Rs.5,00,000/- is claimed as compensation for loss, damages, mental agony and physical sufferings due to the deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. Hence he approached this Commission for directing the opposite party to (1) To replace the Storage Tank and Diesel pump with Flow Meter with new ones and to pay a total of Rs.3,61,300/- and to pay the entire cost of the proceedings.
2. After admitting complaint, notice was issued to the opposite party. Even after receiving the notice, the opposite party did not appear before the Commission.
3. Complainant filed proof affidavit and Exts. A1 – A4 marked.
Ext.A1 is the GST invoice issued by the opposite party dated 25/6/22 showing the purchase of storage tank for Rs.1,59,300/- Ext.A2 is the invoice for the purchase of Diesel Pump with Flow Meter for an amount of Rs.1,00,000.28. Ext.A3 is the Lawyer Notice issued by the complainant’s counsel to the opposite party and Ext.A4 is the correction notice issued by the complainant’s counsel to the opposite party.
4. Complainant’s grievance is that the Flow meter purchased from opposite party is defective and it did not show the actual quantity of Diesel flown through the pump. The complainant entrusted the storage Tank and the Diesel pump with Flow Meter to the shop of the OP for repair or replacement twice. But on both the occasions, the OP made the complainant believe that it is rectified and returned to him. But actually they had not rectified the defect and the Flow Meter is not showing the actual reading for the diesel taken out. He took the Tank and pump to the 3rd opposite party’s shop on 3rd week of November. But they did not resolve the problem.
5. The complainant had stated in his affidavit that the products are still with the OP and they have not returned it after curing the defects or replaced it.
6. Even after the receipt of notice, the opposite party did not appear before the Commission or file their version. To the Lawyer notice issued by complainant’s counsel, they did not send any reply or did not try to resolve the problem.
7. From Ext.A1 & A2 the purchase of storage tank costing Rs.1,59,300/- and Diesel pump with Flow Meter costing Rs.1,00,000/- is proved. The opposite parties failed to cure the defect in the Flow Meter and they did not return it. These items were purchased on 25/06/2022 and it was entrusted to the opposite party for repair for the 3rd time on 3rd week of November which shows that the problems started from the very beginning. So the opposite parties are bound to cure the defects in the Flow Meter. They failed to do this and it is a Deficiency in service on their part. Complainant suffered mental agony and financial loss due to the acts of the opposite party.
8. Complainant alleges manufacturing defect in the Flow Meter. But there is no expert report to support his contention. In the absence of expert report. We are not inclined to allow total replacement or total refund of the purchase value.
9. But for their Deficiency in service, opposite parties bound to compensate the complainant.
In the result, the complaint is allowed in part.
- We direct the opposite parties to cure the defect in the Flow Meter to the satisfaction of the complainant and to return the storage tank and Diesel pump with Flow Meter within I month of the receipt of the copy of this Order or in the alternative to pay Rs 1,50,000/- to the Complainant towards the cost of replacing the defective Flow Meter.
- We further direct the opposite party’s to pay Rs.25,000/- for their deficiency in service and to pay Rs.20,000/- for the mental agony and financial loss suffered by the complainant and Rs.10,000/- as cost of the litigation.
The above amounts are to be paid within 45 days of receipt of this order, failing which the opposite parties are liable to give Rs.500/-as solatium per month or part thereof till the date of payment.
Pronounced in open court on this the 25th day of September, 2023.
Vinay Menon V
President
Vidya.A
Member
