By Smt. PREETHI SIVARAMAN.C, MEMBER
1. Case of the complainant :-
For starting a bakery namely “V BAKES” through PMEGP Programme of Government of India for his livelihood, complainant approached opposite party and wanted a quotation for Rotory Convection Oven and One planetary mixer with netting. As per his request, on 08/06/2017 opposite party gave a quotation for the above item and on 28/06/2017, complainant purchased the oven for Rs. 2,86,250/- and he gave Rs. 10,000/- as advance for the mixer. But due to the difficulties in getting the loan, complainant started the bakery only on 16/07/2018. Complainant had distributed quality baking products and the unit was working in flying colours. The unit was fixed by opposite party at complainant’s bakery and they offered one year warranty and lifelong free service for the above oven. At the time of purchase of the oven complainant paid the money directly to the opposite party and he got the loan thereafter. But complainant did not get the advance amount of Rs.10,000/- from opposite party. Moreover complainant stared the unit only on 16/07/2018 and opposite party gave oral assurance of one year warranty to complainant from the date of installation of the unit .
2. On 08/09/2018 complainant was getting ready to make bakery items, but the oven got dyfunct. At once complainant contacted opposite party through phone, but opposite party did not send service person to rectify the defect. He again contacted opposite party for the quick repair of the oven. Complainant has a commitment for making and distributing puffs for a marriage function that will conduct on 09/09/2018. But opposite party did not reply for the same. Opposite party was hesitate to take the phone calls of complainant. On 11/09/2018 the Manager of the opposite party took the phone and he stated that the warranty period of the oven was over and for giving service and other benefits they want to contact the company and he stated that they had already sent emails to company. On 12/09/2018 at 6.20, due to the continuous request from complainant, opposite party sent a message to complainant that he was ready to sent a service person for repairing the oven and he wanted Rs. 3000/- as service charge. Complainant was ready to pay the money and then opposite party said to complainant that if the motor of the oven have any problem, that was out of stock and they will order the item from foreign country and it will take a period of 1½ months. Thereafter on 17/09/2018 complainant directly approached opposite party shop and complainant demanded to return the advance amount of Rs. 10,000/- from opposite party and opposite party gave the amount to complainant.
3. Thereafter on 18/09/2018, the service person of opposite party approached complainant and he inspected the oven and found that the damage was caused to the motor of the oven. Due to the delay in getting the motor of the oven, complainant was agreed to repair the oven and he gave Rs. 1500/- to the service person. On 23/09/2018 complainant got the repaired motor, but opposite party came and refit the motor only on 25/09/2018. Due to these reasons complainant was forced to close the bakery and he again reopened it only on 02/10/2018. Due to the deficiency of service and unfair trade practice from the side of opposite party, complainant had closed the unit for a period of 25 days. Due to the act of opposite party, complainant was unable to pay the salary of workers and loan repayment and complainant was unable to provide the bakery items as per the orders he got from other shops. Moreover complainant was purchased the puffs from Sego bakery, Manjeri for giving the marriage function he already promised. Thereafter on 19/11/2018 the oven again got dyfunct and the service person of opposite party came only after three days. Due to the deficiency of service from the side of opposite party, complainant have got mental agony and hardships and damaged the good will of the complainant’s bakery. Hence complainant further says that he is entitled to get Rs. 10,00,000/- for the deficiency of service from the side of opposite party and thereby caused mental agony and hard ships to complainant.
4. Prayer of the complainant , he is entitled to get Rs.12,500/- with 12% interest for damage caused to the food items due to the damaged oven , Rs. 1,57,500 with 12% interest due to the closure of complainant’s shop for a period of 25 days, Rs. 40,000/- with 12 % interest for the closure of 5 days of complainant’s shop, Rs. 700/- for purchasing puffs from other shop , Rs. 6200/- with 12% for repairing the motor by the complainant , Rs.10,00,000/- with 12% interest for the deficiency of service from the side of opposite party and Rs. 25,000/- as cost of the proceedings.
5. On admission of the complaint notice was issued to the opposite party and notice served on him and he appeared before the commission and filed version.
6. In their version, they stated that on 28/06/2017 complainant purchased a Rotory Oven worth Rs. 2,86,250/- and complainant paid Rs.10,000/- as advance for the mixer and later the opposite party returned back the amount to complainant. They again stated that as per the policy of the company every machine they are selling has one year warranty from the date of purchase of the machine. It is not an issue for them about the date of using of the machine and it is not their problem that the machine was used by the complainant or not. Moreover they did not provide lifelong warranty for their products. They will never gave such offers to anybody. They admitted that on 08/09/2018 when complainant called the opposite party for service, they are unable to attend the complainant due to other appointments. Moreover the company’s policy is static and there is no scope for changing the policies by the opposite party. Moreover there is a balance of Rs. 1500/- is pending as service charge by the complainant to opposite party. They already rectified the defect of the motor and they installed the motor on 25/09/2018. Hence there is no deficiency of service from their side.
7. In order to substantiate the case of the complainant, he filed an affidavit in lieu of Chief examination and the documents he produced were marked as Ext.A1 to A10. Ext.A1 is the photocopy of quotation given by opposite party to complainant on 08/06/2017, Ext.A2 is the copy is the original invoice given by opposite party to complainant dated 26/06/2017, Ext.A3 is the original interior visit report and the details of payment of Rs.1,500/- made by complainant dated 18/09/2018 given by opposite party service person to complainant, Ext.A4 is the original bill given by Multi Electrical & Service Centre for Rs. 4,500/- after repairing the motor dated 22/09/2018 , Ext. A5 is the original bill for Rs. 3600/- given by Amazon Bakes to complainant, Ext.A6 is the carbon copy of bills given by V Bakes, Kadannamanna to complainant for purchasing puffs dated 06/09/2018 (2 Nos.), Ext. A7 is the original cash memo for Rs. 3000/- given by opposite party’s service person to complainant dated 22/11/2018, Ext. A8 is original visiting card of opposite party, Ext. A9 is the original bill for Rs. 1700/- given by K.M Electricals to complainant for repairing the motor, Ext.10 is the Computer printout of the message sent by opposite party to complainant dated 12/09/2019.
8. But after filing version the opposite party did not file affidavit. Thereafter heard the complainant. Perused the affidavit and documents of complainant. The allegation against opposite party is proved by the unchallenged evidence of complainant. There is no contra evidence in this matter. Moreover complainant produced ten documents which are very supportive to prove his case. Hence the Commission finds that there is deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite party as alleged in the complaint. Hence we allow this complaint holding that opposite party is deficient in service.
9. We allow this complaint as follows:-
- The opposite party is directed to pay compensation of Rs. 50,000/-(Rupees Fifty thousand only) to the complainant on account of deficiency in service on the part of opposite party and thereby caused mental agony, physical hardships and sufferings to the complainant.
- The opposite party is also directed to pay Rs. 5,000/-(Rupees Five thousand only) as cost of the proceedings.
If the above said amount is not paid to the complainant within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order, the opposite party is liable to pay the interest at the rate of 12% per annum on the said amount from the date of receipt of the copy of this order till realisation.
Dated this 31st day of October, 2022.
MOHANDASAN K., PRESIDENT
PREETHI SIVARAMAN C., MEMBER
MOHAMED ISMAYIL C.V., MEMBER
APPENDIX
Witness examined on the side of the complainant : Nil
Documents marked on the side of the complainant : Ext.A1to A10
Ext.A1 : Photocopy of quotation given by opposite party to complainant on
08/06/2017.
Ext.A2 : Copy is the original invoice given by opposite party to complainant dated
26/06/2017.
Ext.A3 : Original interior visit report and the details of payment of Rs.1,500/- made
by complainant dated 18/09/2018 given by opposite party service person
to complainant.
Ext.A4 : Original bill given by Multi Electrical & Service Centre for Rs. 4,500/- after
repairing the motor dated 22/09/2018.
Ext. A5 : Original bill for Rs. 3600/- given by Amazon Bakes to complainant.
Ext.A6 : Carbon copy of bills given by V Bakes, Kadannamanna to complainant for
purchasing puffs dated 06/09/2018 (2 Nos.).
Ext. A7 : Original cash memo for Rs. 3000/- given by opposite party’s service person
Akhil to complainant dated 22/11/2018.
Ext.A8 : Original visiting card of opposite party.
Ext.A9 : Original bill for Rs. 1700/- given by K.M Electricals to complainant for
repairing the motor.
Ext.10 : Computer printout of the message sent by opposite party to complainant
dated 12/09/2019.
Witness examined on the side of the opposite party : Nil
Documents marked on the side of the opposite party : Nil
MOHANDASAN K., PRESIDENT
PREETHI SIVARAMAN C., MEMBER
MOHAMED ISMAYIL C.V., MEMBER
