Consumer complaint No.242/08
Date of presentation: 28.8.2008
Date of decision: 25.4.2009

Vivekananda Medical Research Trust Kaya Kalp Palampur District Kangra, HP through its Chief Executive Officer Sh. Sudarshan Sharma

Complainant
Versus

ISPL Systems Pvt., Ltd 460 B, 4th Phase Peenya Industrial Area, Banglore-560058
Opposite party

Complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986

PRESIDENT: A.S.JASWAL
MEMBER: PABNA SHARMA & PARDEEP DOGRA

For the complainant: Sh. Anuj Sharma, Advocate
Opposite party already exparte

ORDER
A.S.JASWAL, PRESIDENT (ORAL)

In nut-shell, the case of the complainant is that an order for the supply of Electronic Weighing Scale was made to the opposite party vide letter NO. Kaya Kalp/S/O/218, 220 dated 31.5.2007. A sum of Rs.19400/- had also been sent to the opposite party. It is asserted that when the machine in question had not been received within the stipulated time, the complainant had requested the opposite party vide letter No.Kaya-Kalp/S/O/452-454 to supply the machine. It is asserted that on having received the machine in question, the “top” which controls display system had been found defective. Upon this, the opposite party was informed to rectify the defect in the machine. It is asserted that the Engineer of the opposite party, visited the office of the complainant on dated 25.9/2007 for the removal of defect, but on checking the same, he showed his inability to repair the same and that he had taken a component of the machine i.e. ADC Carel (MF AT ADC-03) at Bangalore for repair. It is asserted that thereafter the engineer of the opposite party again visited the office of the complainant on 18.10.2007 and had installed the ADC Carel and the machine was made functional. It is asserted that after few days, the machine had again developed a defect, due to which the complainant had suffered mental pain, agony and inconvenience. The grievance of the complainant is that the opposite party had sold a machine, which had developed defect within the warranty period. In this manner, the opposite party has committed deficiency in service.

2. The opposite party did not appear before the Forum and was proceeded against exparte on 18.11.2008. The complainant adduced exparte evidence in support of his contention.

3. We have heard the learned counsel for the complainant and have also gone through the record of the case, carefully and minutely. From the record it is clear that after the purchase of Weighing Machine, it had not worked properly and stopped giving desired services to the complainant. The complainant is not in a position to use the Weighing machine which he had purchased for Vivekananda Medical Research Trust Kaya Kalp, Palampur. We are of the view that the opposite party was under legal obligation to rectify the defect in the machine, but it had failed to do so. As the opposite party has supplied Weighing machine which was defective, we find that the opposite party has committed deficiency in service. On the contrary, the opposite party opted to remain exparte during the proceedings of the present case. It means that whatever has been asserted by the complainant in his complaint, that has been admitted by it as true and correct. Hence, we hold that the opposite party has committed deficiency in service.

4. Now how this deficiency can be cured? We find that the ends of justice will be met in case the opposite party is directed to repair the weighing machine to the entire satisfaction of the complainant at Palampur within 45 days after the receipt of copy of this order, failing which to replace the same with new one of the same make and model. Due to the deficiency in service, the complainant has also suffered mental pain, agony and inconvenience and the ends of justice will be met in case the opposite party is directed to pay compensation which is quantified at Rs.5000/-.


5. In view of what has been stated above, the complaint is partly allowed and we order the opposite party to repair the defective weighing machine to the entire satisfaction of the complainant, at Palampur within 45 days after the receipt of copy of this order, failing which to replace the same with new one of the same make and model. The opposite party is also directed to pay compensation to the complainant to the tune of Rs.5000/-. The complaint is allowed alongwith litigation costs of Rs.2000/-..