DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, PALAKKAD

Dated this the   28 ^th day of November, 2023

Present  : Sri.Vinay Menon V. President

                       : Smt. Vidya.A., Member

                       :  Sri. Krishnankutty N K, Member

                                                                                   Date of filing: 27/06/2023.

CC/166/2023

Mahalakshmi                                                         -        Complainant

Alakananda Mangalam (PO),

Lakkidi, Palakkad - 679 301

(Party-in-person)

V/s

The Mananger/Proprietor                                      -        Opposite Party

Best Deal Machineries Pvt. Ltd,

Near Tilak Nagar

New Delhi - 110 018

(Ex-parte)

O R D E R

Smt Vidya  A, Member

1. Pleading of the complainant in brrief

                    The complainant purchased a “Double die crank thali machine”      from the opposite party on 28/06/2022 for an amount of Rs      2,90,000/-.           She paid Rs 2,99,950/-including the parcel charge of 9,950/- for the        purchase. The complainant constructed a shed for installation of the    machineries by spending  Rs 88,795/-  and  bought  raw materials for production costing Rs 21,000/-. The opposite party imparted training to the complainant for operating the machine only after          one month. The    complainant got electric shock while operating the machine and she      informed  about this to the opposite party and  a technician of the opposite party inspected the machine and found it to be Motor           complaint.  The    opposite party promised to send new motor and it         was    sent on 6/8/22 through courier. But the motor was found it to be     in damaged condition even at the time of collecting it from courier office.

As per opposite party’s advice, the complainant searched for a motor suitable for the machine in Kerala but she could not find out. After contacting the opposite party several times through phone and whats app, they sent another motor on 23/08/22. But they did not sent a technician to fit to the machine.

          The complainant lodged a complaint with National Consumer         Helpline and after that the opposite party contacted the complainant and   promised to solve the issue. As per that a technician of the opposite party visited the complainant’s house and made the motor functional. But the         machine became defective within 12 days.

          Later, as per opposite party’s direction, the complainant send both the damaged motors to the opposite party in separate wooden boxes.          Even though complainant contacted the opposite party many times    through phone and e-mail, there was no response from their part.

So the complainant approached this Commission for directing

(1) The opposite party to refund Rs 3,08,450/- (machine cost+parcel       charge+transport charge) after taking the defective machineries supplied by the opposite party, (2) To pay Rs 88,795/- being the cost incurred in   constructing the shed, wiring, and for installation of machinery (3) To pay   Rs 6220/- being the cost incurred in transporting the motors and                 Rs.21,000/- for the cost of raw materials purchased by her together with           interest at 12% for the above amount. She also claims Rs 50,000/- for    the mental agony suffered by her and Rs 5000/- as cost of the litigation.

(2) Complaint was admitted. Notice sent to the opposite party at the              first instance was not delivered. The notice sent through e-mail was delivered to the opposite party; but they did not appear or file version. So      they were set ex-parte.

(3) Complainant filed Proof Affidavit and Exts A1-A16 were marked      from her side.

(4) In the absence of any counter from the side of the opposite party,   the complainant has only to prove a prima-facie case against the opposite           party.

(5) The complainant’s contention is that she purchased a machine      from the opposite party by expending an amount of Rs 2,99,950/-           including parcel charges on 28/06/2022.

The complaint produced the ‘Tax Invoice’ dated 18/06/22 issued by the opposite party for an amount of R 2,90,000/-. Ext A10 is the invoice copy issued by URL LOGISTICS LTD for Rs 9950/-. Ext A12 to A16 are the Bank statement of accounts of showing the transfer of money to the opposite party. Ext A12 shows transfer of Rs 5000/- the opposite party on 17/12/21, Ext A13 shows transfer of Rs 45,000/- on 09/06/22. Ext A14 shown transfer of Rs 50,000/- on 13/06/22, Ext A15 shows transfer of Rs 21,000/- on 20/06/22 and Ext A16 shows the transfer of Rs 1,90,000/- on 28/06/22. Thus the complainant had proved that she had made a total payment of Rs 3,11,000/- towards the purchase of the machinery. Ext A2 is the Invoice dated 27/06/22 showing the purchase of raw material (Paper Roll) for Rs 21,000/-. The complainant’s contention is that she was given training for operating the machine only after one month of its purchase and she got electric shock while using it. A technician of the opposite party attended the issue and found the motor to be defective. On informing about this, they sent another motor which was in damaged condition even at the time of collecting it from courier office. Again, on repeated demands and requests, the opposite party send another motor on 22/08/22. But the technician did not visit complainant’s premise to fit the motor and make it functional.

6. So the complainant registered a complaint with National consumer           Helpline. After one week, the opposite party contacted the complainant   and promised to solve the issue. As per that a technician attended the    issue on 01/11/22 and fitted the motor, and extended warranty for a     period of one year from that date.

7. But the machine worked only for 12 days and then became defective. As   per opposite party’s direction, the complainant send  both the damaged        motors to the opposite party in separate wooden boxes on 12/01/2023.    After that the opposite party did not respond to the complainant’s call.

8. In order to prove her contentions, the complainant produced some           document which were marked in evidence.

          EXT A3 is the ‘Service Call Report’ dated 29/07/22 issued by opposite     `party in which the Remarks/action taken by technician shows “training       given”. Ext A4 Service Call Report dated 02/08/22 shows the “type of   complaint as motor complaint” and remarks shows ‘change motor’. Ext        A7 shows the Type of complainant as “Earthing Correction” and Remarks     as “Earth Wire connected”. Ext A7 is the copy of the e-mail     communication between the complainant’s husband and opposite party         in which the opposite party had extended the warranty from 01/11/22       onwards. Ext A8 is the receipt issued by URL Logistics for sending the          motor to the opposite party. According to the complainant, the opposite      party did not do anything to resolve the issue. Because of the motor           complaint, the complainant s unable to function the machinery and earn          her livelihood.

So from the evidence adduced, it is clear that there is Deficiency in Service on the part of the opposite party in not curing the defects in the motor or replace it with a new one in good working condition. The acts of the opposite party had caused mental agony and financial loss to the complainant for which the opposite party is bound to compensation the complainant.

                    In the result, complaint is allowed.

1. We direct the opposite party to refund Rs 3,08,450/- being the value of the machine+parcel charges together with 10% interest from 27/06/23 till realization.

2. The opposite party is also directed to pay Rs 20,000/- as compensation for their Deficiency in Service, Rs 50,000/- as compensation for the mental and financial loss (including the cost incurred in construction of shed, purchase of raw material etc) and Rs 5000/- as cost of the litigation

Pronounced in open court on this the 28^th day of November, 2023.

                                                                                              Sd/-

                                                                                                 Vinay Menon V

President.

  Sd/-

                                                                                                     Vidya A     

Member