By Sri.  A.S. Subhagan,  Member:

            This is a complaint filed  under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986.

            2. Facts of the case of the complaint in brief are as follows:-  The  Complainant Moidu Athalin purchased  a Chapathi Press Machine from the Opposite Party’s          shop on 19.04.2018 for     Rs.630/-   as per invoice      number C12180.     While the Complainant’s  wife was trying to make chapathi, the Complainant and his wife could find that the chapathi pressing  machine was not pressing properly and                 chapathi could not be made by using that chapathi pressing machine.  Immediately on finding this defect the Complainant informed  the  matter to the Opposite Party but  the Opposite Party refused to replace  the  defective chapathi press machine.  The act from the side of the Opposite Party caused great  mental pain and difficulty to the Complainant and his wife.  Further, when the Complainant enquired about the manufacturer of the chapathi press machine the Opposite party told that the machine was made by themselves.  The Complainant submits that  since there has been  deficiency in service and unfair trade practice from the Opposite Party,                           the Complainant has the right to get the chapathi press machine replaced or to get    back the price of the chapathi press  machine  with  interest   and   damages.  Hence the Complainant prays before the Forum to direct  the Opposite Party.

1.   To replace the defective chapathi press machine with a new one of the  same model with proper bill or to give back the amount paid by the Complainant together with interest.
2. To give Rs.630/-  of the chapathi press  machine and Rs.5,000/-  being the original loss suffered by the Complainant on account of loss and inconvenience and  mental  agony to the Complainant.
3.   To give Rs.5,000/-  as compensation for the loss and inconveniences, damages and mental agony suffered  by the Complainant on account of unfair trade practice of the Opposite Party and
4. To pay the costs of the  complaint.

3. Version of the Opposite Party is as follows:-  The above  complaint is filed on experimental basis without any merit and not  maintainable in law or on facts and liable to be dismissed in limine.  The Opposite Party admits that the chapathi press machine  was purchased  from his shop.  He denies the averment of  the Complainant that the chapathi press  machine is not getting pressed.  Opposite Party submits that the Complainant, had neither approached the Opposite Party nor  the Opposite party has refused to replace it.  According  to the Opposite Party there is  no defect in the machine and the functioning mechanism  is very simple and it works  upon the physical power of the user and the pressing perfection etc.  are checked before it was supplied by the distributor.   The Opposite Party allegates that the reported  complaint of the chapathi press machine has not been proved  by any expert report.  Opposite Party is not the manufacturer of the chapathi press machine  and  he has never told the Complainant that the Opposite Party is the manufacturer of the machine.  The Complainant has not impleaded the manufacturer of the chapathi making machine      and the case is bad for non-joinder of  necessary parties.    All  other  averments of the

complaint are denied by the  Opposite Party and adds that no unfair  trade  practice has been there from his part and as the Complainant is not entitled  for any relief  and compensation, he prays before the Forum to dismiss the complaint.

            4. The complaint was registered  and notice was served on the Opposite party.   Opposite Party filed his version.  The Complainant  was examined as PW1 on 16.12.2019  and Ext.A1 and MO1 were marked  from his side.  Ext.A1 is the original  bill dated 19.04.2018 issued by the Opposite Party and MO1 is the chapathi press machine purchased by the Complainant from the Opposite party.  Opposite Party was examined as OPW1 on 20.02.2020 and  finally on 12.03.2020.  The complaint  was heard on 12.03.2020 itself.

5.  After perusing the complaint, version,  affidavit,  documents and MO1 marked and the evidences of both the Complainant and the Opposite Party, the Forum raised the following points for consideration:-

1.  Whether  there has been any unfair trade practice   or deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite party?
2. If so,  whether  the Complainant is entitled to get any compensation as prayed for?
3. Relief and cost.

6. Point No.1:-  It is the admitted fact   that   the   chapathi   press    machine is

purchased by the Complainant as per Ext.A1 bill  from  the Opposite Party.  Opposite Party has admitted in cross examination that he has denied the complaint of the chapathi press machine without seeing  and  examining  chapathi press machine.  At the time of cross examination after inspection of  the MO1  the Opposite Party has admitted that there has been breakage  and bulging  on the steel plate of the machine.  He also added that  the Complainant has the right to get the defective chapathi press machine replaced, and as the MO1 is seen defective  Opposite Party  is liable to  replace the MO1.  In the version or cross examination the Opposite party has not disclosed     the name and address of the  manufacturer of the MO1.  Hence there is no                    way   to   disbelieve  the allegation of the Complainant that the chapathi press machine is manufactured by the Opposite party.  Therefore the forum  declare  that the complaint is not bad for non-jointer of necessary party.  The Forum thoroughly  examined the MO1 and undoubtedly found that the chapathi press machine is defective which has also been admitted by the Opposite Party   himself,    in cross examination.  Hence, no expert report is needed in this regard.  Selling  defective goods is unfair trade practice and denying to replace it even after  demanded by the Complainant is deficiency in service.  Hence point No.1 is  proved against the Opposite Party.

            7. Point No.2:-  Since point No.1 is proved  against the Opposite party the Complainant is entitled to get compensation.

            In the result  the complaint is  partly allowed and the Opposite party is directed :-

1.  To take back the defective chapathi press machine and to replace it with a new one of the same model with proper bill or to give back the amount paid by the Complainant as per bill together with interest @ 9% per annum  to the Complainant with effect from the date of purchase of the machine till the date of making payment.
2. To pay Rs.2,500/- (Rupees Two thousand Five hundred only)  as compensation for  unfair trade practice and deficiency in service resulting in inconvenience and  mental agony to the Complainant and.
3. To  pay Rs.2,000/-  (Rupees Two thousand Five hundred only) being  the  cost of the  complaint.

The above order shall be obeyed  by the Opposite Party within  one month from the date of this order.

Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by him and corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 23^rd   day of March 2020.

Date of filing:26.04.2018.

                                                                                                PRESIDENT:    Sd/

                                                                                                MEMBER   :    Sd/-

                                                                                                MEMBER  :     Sd/-

APPENDIX.

Witness for the Complainant.:-

PW1.              Moidu.                                  Complainant.

Witness for the Opposite Party:-

OPW1.          Siraj. P.                                 

Exhibits for the Complainant:    

A1.         Bill.                          dt:19.04.2018.

MO1.    Chapathi Press Machine.

Exhibits for the Opposite Party:-

Nil.