O R D E R

A. Rajesh, President.

1. Shortly stated, the case of the complainant is as follows :

The complainant is a partnership firm engaged in the sale of ready made garments. The complainant purchased a printer from the opposite party on 13-12-2007 at a price of Rs. 18,000/-. The opposite party provided one year warranty for the same. Time and again, the complainant had to approach the opposite party to rectify the defects of the machine, but the opposite party did not turn up. Finally on 05-11-2008, the complainant caused to issue a lawyer notice to the opposite party to replace the printer and to pay a compensation of Rs. 10,000/-. The opposite party sent a reply to the complainant stating untenable contentions. Thus, the complainant is before us seeking direction against the opposite party to pay the price of the machine or replace the same together with compensation and costs.

2. Version of the opposite party :

The complaint is not maintainable, since the complainant has purchased the machine for commercial purpose. The printer supplied by the opposite party is free from any defects. The complainant installed the printer not in proper condition. When paper jam occurred the complainant pulled back the paper without taking it through the same direction. It was due to the careless handling of the printer it did not work properly. The printer head is a part of the printer but which does not cover the guarantee. The complainant has not taken any steps to get his grievances redressed through the manufacturer of the printer. The complaint is devoid of any merit and liable for dismissal.

3. The witness for the complainant was examined as PW1 and Exts. A1 to A5 were marked on the side of the complainant. Neither oral nor documentary evidence was adduced by the opposite party. Heard the counsel for the parties.

4. The points that arose for consideration are :-

1. Whether the complainant is a consumer?

2. Whether the complainant is entitled to get replacement of the printer under dispute or refund of its price?

3. Compensation and costs, if any?

5. Point No. i) :- Evidently, the complainant purchased the machine to generate profit to earn his livelihood by means of self-employment wherein invariably he had to employ others for due performance. So we have no hesitation to hold that the complainant is a consumer which is not questionable as per Rule of law.

6. Point No. ii) :- At the instance of the complainant, this Forum directed the opposite party to furnish the present address of the manufacturer. Initially, the opposite party undertook to furnish the address of the manufacturer. However later, they submitted that they are unable to furnish the present address of the manufacturer, since at present they have no business transaction with the manufacturer. It is the settled position of law that if the dealer is unable to reveal or furnish the address of the manufacturer, the dealer is answerable for the manufacturing defect if any of the product. It is not in dispute that the complainant had purchased a printer along with accessories at a price of Rs. 31,200/-. The price of the printer was Rs. 18,000/- evidenced by Ext. A12. Ext. A2 goes to show that the complainant duly intimated the opposite party regarding the mal-functioning of the machine. The opposite party sent Ext. A5 reply disowning their liability. The opposite party ought to have intimated the manufacturer about the mal-functioning of the printer as and when the complainant intimated the same to the opposite party in which they failed. Instead of that they have issued Ext. A5 letter to the complainant raising untenable contentions. The consumer in this case, the complainant purchased the printer in question to supplement his business. He had purchased the same with an expectation to use the same for a long time. But his expectation was not fulfilled due to the deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. Since the opposite party fails to furnish the address of the manufacturer, the opposite party alone is liable either to replace the printer or to refund its price to the complainant.

7. Point No. iii) :- Since the primary grievance of the complainant has been met squarely, we order no compensation and costs.

8. In the result, we allow the complaint and direct that, the opposite party shall replace the printer in question with a new one of the same price according to the choice of the complainant or in the alternative the opposite party shall refund Rs. 18,000/- together with interest at the rate of 12% p.a. from the date of complaint till realisation. In either of the event, the complainant shall hand over the defective printer to the opposite party simultaneously.

The order shall be complied with, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

Pronounced in open Forum on this the 31^st day of May 2011.