Date of filing : 24-07-2014
Date of order : 30-10-2014
IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KASARAGOD
CC.163/2014
Dated this, the 30th day of October 2014
PRESENT:
SMT.P.RAMADEVI : PRESIDENT
SMT.K.G.BEENA : MEMBER
SMT.SHIBA.M.SAMUEL : MEMBER
Shreelatha Sathisha, Proprietress, : Complainant
Manasa Eco Bags,
Kinfra Industrial Park, Seethangoli,
Maipady.Po, Kasaragod, Kerala
(Sri.K.M.Ballakuraya , Kasaragod)
U.Ramesh & Asif, : Opposite party
Partners M/s.Dream Pac Machines,
D-6,Madani Complex, 100 ft.Road,
Gandhipuram, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu
(Exparte)
O R D E R
SMT.K.G.BEENA, MEMBER
The case of the complainant Smt. Shreelatha is that she purchased a semi automatic bag printing machine for a sum of Rs. 4,59,000/- from opposite party. After purchase complainant noticed that the said machine is basically defective, that the bags cannot printed at all. The bag feeding system and drum pressure is not at all functioning. Besides this the price quotation given by opposite party to the complainant is of an imported machine. But the machine supplied by opposite party is a machine which is locally assembled one, further the performance of the printing machine was very poor. Further the bag counting operator was also not at all functioning. And the roller alignment had problem and due to the same stereo gets damaged often resulting in replacement of stereo involving huge cost. Therefore she could not print bags and need to make alternative arrangements to print the bag. This has involved huge extra cost and time consuming because of this she could not supply bags to customers and thereby incurred huge loss and mental agony. Complainant had intimated to the same to opposite party through E-mail but opposite party failed to reply the above E-mails. The opposite party never bothered to set right the problem. Even the Engineers of opposite party could not get final print in the bag printing machine. This amounts to deficiency of service by opposite party hence the complaint for necessary redressal.
2. Notice to opposite party returned unclaimed. Name of opposite party called absent and set exparte.
3. Complainant filed proof of affidavit. Exts A1 to A11 marked. Heard the complainant.
The complainant an enterprenure running a bag manufacturing small scale industry for her livelihood and for self employment. She intended to install bag printing machine and opposite party offered to supply an imported machine. Opposite party had supplied the machine for Rs. 4,59,000/- but after purchase complainant came to know that the machine supplied by opposite party is defective one and it is locally assembled. She could not print the bag and constrained to make alternative arrangements for printing bags. This has involved huge extra cost and labour. In this regard she suffered huge loss and mental agony due to the negligent act of opposite party. Even though she informed the difficulties to opposite party through E-mail it was not properly considered or opposite party never bothered to set right her problem. Opposite party has committed not only breach of contract but also played fraud. Opposite party is duty bounded to refund the price of the printing machine and damages. The quality nature and manner of performance of service of opposite party involved unfair trade practice. By perusing the complaint affidavit and documents before us we are of the opinion that the acts of opposite party amounts to unfair trade practice and deficiency in service. Even the engineers of opposite party could not get final print from the bag printing machine implies the machine is defective and locally assembled one. But opposite party promised to supply an imported machine. Considering the financial loss mental agony loss of goodwill of the small scale industry run by a lady enterprenure we are of the opinion that her loss and mental agony has to be compensated. The entire society is bound to encourage her as a lady enterprenure. A Similar case is discussed in M/s Arunodaya Printers V M/s Mehta Computers (1986-2004) Consumer 7680(NS) complainant, a woman for setting up a small scale unit for Desk Top printing requiring computers
In the result, complaint is allowed and opposite party is directed to refund the price of the machine for Rs.4,59,000/- with 12% interest from the date of purchase i.e, from 09-11-2013 till realization with Rs.50,000/- as damages and Rs.5,000/- as costs to the complainant within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of the order. Failing which Rs.4,59,000/- will carry 15% interest from 09-11-2013 till payment.
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
Exts.
A1. 09-11-2013 Proforma issued by OP to complainant for an amount of Rs.4,59,000/-.
A2.14-08-2013 letter issued by OP
A3. 28-10-2013 Payment Receipt
A4 to A9 E-Mails sent by the complainant to OP
A10. 5-5-2014 Copy of lawyer notice.
A11. Postal acknowledgment card
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
Pj/
