Punjab

Amritsar

CC/16/293

Mohinder Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Vishwkarma Enterprises - Opp.Party(s)

Deepinder Singh

07 Sep 2016

ORDER

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum
SCO 100, District Shopping Complex, Ranjit Avenue
Amritsar
Punjab
 
Complaint Case No. CC/16/293
 
1. Mohinder Singh
Gali no.1, Tehsilpura, Near Biala Hospital, Amritsar
Amritsar
Punjab
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. Vishwkarma Enterprises
VPO Bajuha Kalan, Tehsil Nakodar, Jalandhar
Jalandhar
Punjab
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
  Sh. S.S.Panesar PRESIDENT
  Anoop Lal Sharma MEMBER
 
For the Complainant:
For the Opp. Party:
Dated : 07 Sep 2016
Final Order / Judgement

 

 

 

Order dictated by:

Sh.S.S. Panesar, President.

1        Mohinder  Singh has brought the instant complaint  u/s 12 & 13 of the Consumer Protection Act on the allegations that complainant is running a small work for earning his livelihood by means of self employment . For his self employment, complainant purchased the machinery for making Donas for his work from the opposite party,who is manufacturer and supplier of the machinery products, as such complainant becomes the consumer as provided under the Act. The complainant placed an order for the said machinery to the executives of the opposite party and the same was to be installed by the opposite party at the premises of the complainant.  Opposite party took Rs. 1 lac from the complainant and issued the receipt thereof on 22.10.2014 and later issued the invoice  and supplied the machinery , which was non functional and was without its attachments and was worth of Rs. 45000/- only. But thereafter opposite party did not supply the attachments of the machinery . Ultimately opposite party took back the said machinery  on 1.5.2015 on the ground that attachments are not available  and they will supply the new machinery within fortnight. Thereafter complainant made so many calls and personal visits to the opposite party, but to no avail . Till the filing of the present complaint, opposite party has failed to supply the machinery  or in the alternative to refund the price of the machinery. The aforesaid act of the opposite party in not supplying the machinery as promised is an act of deficiency in service, unfair trade practice and mal practice and is not sustainable in the eyes of law. The complainant has sought for the following reliefs vide instant complaint:-

(a)     Opposite party be directed to replace the machinery supplied  with new one or to refund Rs. 1 lac alongwith interest @ 18% p.a. from the date of payment till realization.

(b)     Compensation to the tune of Rs. 50000/- alongwith adequate litigation expenses may also be awarded to the complainant.

Hence, this complaint.

2.       Opposite party did not put in appearance despite service as such it was ordered to be proceeded against ex-parte.

3.       In his bid to prove the case, complainant tendered into his ex-parte evidence his duly sworn affidavit Ex.C-1, copy of payment receipt dated 22.10.2014 Ex.C-2, copy of invoice dated 22.10.2014 Ex.C-3 and closed his evidence.

4.       We have heard the ld.counsel for the complainant  and have carefully gone through the record on the file.

5.       From the appraisal of the evidence on record, it becomes evident that complainant Mohinder  Singh purchased one machinery for preparing Donas on 22.10.2014. The complainant paid an amount of Rs. 1 lac to the opposite party and receipt to that effect was issued in his favour, which is Ex.C-2 on record. The opposite party sold one Dona Machine Double-die Fully Automatic for a sum of Rs. 45000/- vide invoice/cash memo Ex.C-3 .But, however, the remaining attachments of the said machine were not provided to the complainant despite making requests for a number of times . On 1.5.2015, the opposite party received back the machine sold vide invoice/cash memo dated 22.10.2014 from the complainant vide writing made on bill/Invoice Ex.C-3. Afterwards the opposite party neither supplied any other machine or attachments to the complainant nor refunded the amount of Rs. 1 lac obtained by him from the complainant. The complainant made several requests  but his requests fell on deaf ears.

6.         The evidence adduced by the complainant has gone unrebutted on record as opposite party despite due service did not opt to appear and contest the complaint and thereby impliedly admitted the claim of the complainant.

7.         Consequently, we hold that the opposite party is under legal obligation to refund the amount of Rs.  1 lac  obtained by it from the complainant vide receipt dated 22.10.2014 Ex.C-2 alongwith interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of filing of the complaint until full and final recovery. Cost of litigation are assessed at Rs. 2000/-. Compliance of this order be made within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of order ; failing which, complainant is entitled to get the order executed through the indulgence of this Forum. Copies of the orders be furnished to the parties free of costs. File is ordered to be consigned to the record room.

Announced in Open Forum

Dated : 07.09.2016

/R/                                                                            

 
 
[ Sh. S.S.Panesar]
PRESIDENT
 
[ Anoop Lal Sharma]
MEMBER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.