Karnataka

Chitradurga

CC/309/2019

Kum.Shruthi.G.D, D/o Dodda Veerappa Gowda - Complainant(s)

Versus

USHA Sewing Machine Dealers/ Proprietor - Opp.Party(s)

Inperson

20 Jul 2019

ORDER

COMPLAINT FILED ON : 28/03/2019

                         DISPOSED ON:20/07/2019

 

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHITRADURGA

 

CC. NO.309/2019 DATED:20th JULY 2019

 

PRESENT :-         SRI.T.N.SREENIVASAIAH      :   PRESIDENT                                                     B.A., LL.B.,

SMT. JYOTHI RADHESH JEMBAGI

BSc.,MBA., DHA.,         :     LADY MEMBER

                             SRI. SHIVAKUMAR.K.N         :     MEMBER

                                      M.Com., LL.B.,

COMPLAINANT/S	Kum. Shruthi G.D. D/o Dodda Veerappa   Gowda, Aged about 34 years, Nagasamudra Post, Molakalmuru Taluk, Chitradurga District Pin Code-57753.                (Rep by In-person)
OPPOSITE PARTIES	1.USHA Sewing Machine Dealers/Proprietor, Usha Sewing Machine Store, Theru Beedi Road, Near Mothi Circle, Bellari District. Bellari. (Rep by Sri.B. Pyarejan, OP No.1 Advocate) 2. Registered Office, Usha International Limited, Suryakiran Building, 19, Kasturba Gandhi Marg, New Delhi-110001. (OP.2 Ex-parte)

 

SRI. T.N. SREENIVASAIAH: PRESIDENT

ORDER

The complainant has filed this complaint U/s 12 of C.P. Act 1986 against the OPs claiming compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- along with interest from the date of handed over Sewing Machine and  for such other reliefs.

2. BRIF FACTS OF THE CASE: That the Complainant  is the absolute owner of the sewing Machine the same has been purchased from her relatives  for the purpose of stitching the cloths for his livelihood accordingly the complainant has paid 5,000/- towards purchasing of the above said sewing Machine. While at the time of purchasing the above said Usha Sewing Machine, the said machine  is perfect and in a good condition. After lapse of two months some defects has been found in the said machine. The complainant has visited the OP.1 shop for repair. Accordingly the OP.1 has received the above said machine and told the complainant there is some defects in the machine we have to straight the same within 2-3 hours. After 3 hours the complainant has visited the shop of OP.1 by that time the OP.1 told the complainant problems was solved. On the faith words of the OP.1 the complainant take back the above said machine. After using 2 months again the same problems has been found in the above said machine. After that the complainant have contacted some other repairer. By that time repairer inform the complainant some original parts have been removed in the above said machine. Immediately the complainant approach the OP.1 and enquired the same. By that time OP.1 has given evasive answer to the complainant. The complainant have visited the OP.1 shop nearly 8-9 times. The complainant have done the stitching work nearly 5 to 6 months because of original parts have removed from the above said machine. The above said machine have not repaired properly by the OP.1 the complainant  have loss  5 to 6 thousand per month. Finally complainant have approached OP.1 in the month of February 2019. By that time  also the OP.1 have gave evasive answer.  Hence this complaint.

3. After service of notice, one Sri. B. Pyarejan, Advocate appeared on behalf of OP.1 and filed his version.  OP.2 absent. Placed Ex-parte.

4. According to the version filed by the OP.1 the complaint filed by the complainant is utterly false, vexatious and not maintainable either  in law or on facts. And  same is liable to be dismissed in limine. The Government has sanctioned sewing machine to the physically handicapped persons as the complainant is not a physically handicapped person. And she is also not a beneficiary under Government Scheme. As per the complaint it clearly shows that the complainant has purchased the said sewing machine from the original beneficiary under the Government Scheme. The complainant has purchased the said machine from the original beneficiary, hence the complainant is not consumer within the meaning of Section 2(1)(d) of the Consumer Protection Act and is not entitled to get any benefit from this Forum.

5. Further the OP.1 submitted that there are  5-6 Usha dealer shops are situated in Teeru Beedi of Bellary City. The postal person has mistakenly delivered the notice of the above case to the shop worker of this OP. He did not repair the said machine at any point of time. Hence OP.1 is not a necessary party to this proceedings.  This Forum has no jurisdiction to decide the matter in controversy as it is purely a civil matter and only jurisdictional Civil Court has to decide the matter. Further submitted that said machine was repaired in Bellary city. The cause of action arose at Bellary city only and this Forum have no jurisdiction to try this complaint on this ground. Hence pray for dismissal of the above complaint.

6. On behalf of complainant, complainant has examined as PW-1 by filing affidavit evidence and the documents Ex.A-1 to A-3 were got marked and closed her side. On behalf of OP.1 Sri. A Shankar Rao has examined as DW-1 by filing the affidavit evidence and closed his side.

7.     Arguments of both sides heard.

8.     Now the points that arise for our consideration for decision of above complaints are that;

(1)  Whether the OP.1 proves that whether the complaint is maintainable or not. 

(2) Whether the OP.1 proves that this Forum have not  got jurisdiction to entertain this complaint.

(3) Whether the complainant proves that the OP.1 have committed deficiency of service while settling the claim of the complaint.

              (2) What order?

        9.     Our findings on the above points are as follows:-

                 Point No.1 and 2 :- Negative.

Point No.2:- As per final order.

REASONS

10. Point No.1 and 2:- The point No.1 and 2 are arising out of the same cause. Hence both points considered commonly. That the complainant has filed this complaint against the OPs for recovery of money for non-repairing of the sewing machine and removing of original parts from the sewing machine.  After the notice has been served to the OPs.  OP.2 placed ex-parte. OP.1 appeared through his counsel and filed his version. According to the version filed by the OP.1 this Forum have not got Jurisdiction to entertain this complaint and this complainant is not a Consumer U/s 2(1)(d) of the Consumer protection Act. In this case complainant is went to the OP.1 shop for repairing her sewing machine. The OP.1 have received the sewing machine and agreed to get it repaired and bill also given by the OP.1 to the complainant for repair charge. The complaint has purchased the above said sewing machine from his relatives at Nagasamudra, Molakalmuru Taluk, Chitradurga District. She done the tailoring work at Nagasamudra only. The OP.1 have given the repair charge bill to the complainant. Hence the complainant having got Jurisdiction to filed this complaint and the complainant is the Consumer Under the Consumer protection Act. Hence Point No.1 and 2 held Negative.

        11. Point No.3:- There is no dispute between both parties that the complainant is the absolute owner of the sewing machine the same has been purchased from her relative for a sum of Rs.5,000/- and done the tailoring work for her livelihood and further the complainant is a un-employed Graduate. She is utilize the amount earning from the tailoring work for her computer education and clear the loan obtain from the Dharmasthala Manjunatha Swamy society. The loan was obtained for her M.A.B-ed education. The OP.1 not properly rectify the problems in the  Sewing machine. The complainant as put great loss and mental agony which cannot be compensated by the any means. By allowing this complaint. The OP.1 has committed deficiency of Service while repair the sewing machine properly and remove the original parts. And further the OP.1 have give the bill in a white slip in this regard also the OP.1 have committed un-fair trade practice. Any angle shows that the OP.1 have committed deficiency of service. The complainant is un-employed graduate. And further the complainant have cleared the loan obtain from the Sri. Dharmastala Majunatha Swamy Society by earning in this sewing machine only. The OP.1 have committed deficiency of service. Hence the Point No.3 held partly affirmative.  

        12. We have gone through the entire documents, affidavit and written arguments of both sides. There is no dispute between both the parties that the complainant is having Sewing machine for doing tailoring work for his livelihood and cleared the loan obtained from the society. The complainant is on un-employed Graduate. The Exibts produced by the complainant are clearly goes to shows that the complainant was purchase the above said sewing machine for her livelihood because she is un employed graduate.  Because of none repairing the sewing machine and removing original parts from the complainant sewing machine. The complainant have been put into great loss and suffered lot. Hence the OP.1 have committed deficiency of service while repairing sewing machine properly. Hence, we pass the following order:

ORDER

 

The complaint filed by the complainant U/s 12 of CP Act 1986 is hereby partly allowed.

 

It is ordered that, the OP.1 is hereby directed to pay a sum of Rs. 5000/- towards cost of the sewing machine along with interest at rate of 9% from 18/12/2018 till realization.

Further it is ordered that the OP.1 is hereby directed to pay sum of Rs. 10,000/- towards mentally agony and Rs.5,000/- towards cost of this proceedings. 

It is further ordered that, the OP.1 is hereby directed to comply the above said order within 30 days from the date of this order.

 

(This order is made with the consent of Members after the correction of the draft on 20/07/2019 and it is pronounced in the open Court after our signatures)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

LADY MEMBER               MEMBER                 PRESIDENT

 

-:ANNEXURES:-

Witnesses examined on behalf of Complainant:

PW-1:-Complainant by filing affidavit evidence.

Witnesses examined on behalf of OP No.1:

DW-1:- Sri. A. Shankar Rao S/o Venkataramana, by filing affidavit evidence.

 

 

Documents marked on behalf of Complainant:

01	Ex-A-1:-	Letter of G.R. Rajeshwari dated 01/11/2018 for sold the sewing machine to the complainant.
02	Ex-A-2:-	Warranty Card issued by the Usha Sewing machine
03	Ex-A-3:-	Repaired charge Bill issued by the OP.1

 

Documents marked on behalf of OP No.1: NIl

 

 

 

LADY MEMBER               MEMBER                 PRESIDENT

KMS.,