BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM ::
KADAPA Y.S.R DISTRICT
PRESENT SRI V.C. GUNNAIAH, B.Com., M.L., PRESIDENT
SMT. K. SIREESHA, LADY MEMBER
SRI M.V.R. SHARMA, MEMBER
Thursday, 8th September 2016
CONSUMER COMPLAINT No. 15 / 2016
Mr. M. Naredra Reddy, S/o Nageswar Reddy,
aged about 28 years, H.No. 6-54, Kogatam Village,
Kamalapuram Mandal,
Kadapa District (AP) – 516 289. ….. Complainant.
Vs.
Mr. Ramesh Vemula, Proprietor of Sri Datta
Universal Telechonologies, (High Speed Routers
CNC Manufacturers), # 52, Near Navata Transport
Head Office Beside VRL Godowns,
Auto Nagar to Kanuru Road, Vijayawada – 520 007 (AP).
Krishna District. ………Opposite party
This complaint coming on this day for final hearing on 29-8-2016 in the presence of Sri P.V. Ramana Reddy, Advocate for Complainant and respondent appeared as in person and upon perusing the material papers on record, the Forum made the following:-
O R D E R
(Per Smt. K. Sireesha, Member),
1. Complaint filed under section 12 of C.P. Act 1986.
2. The brief facts of the complaint are as follows:- It is submitted that the Complainant is the resident of Kogatam village of Kamalapuram Mandal in Kadapa district of Andhra Pradesh. He is doing wood carpentry designing work in Kadapa town. He is the graduate. He has started business under Self employment programme scheme. He has invested money borrowing from money lenders. He hails from the agricultural family.
3. It is submitted that the Opposite party Mr. Ramesh Vemula is running his business as the proprietor of Sri Datta Universal Technologies at Vijayawada (manufacturers and supplies of High Speed CNC Routers). The Complainant submits that he has purchased CNC router machine (Model CY-1325C) worth of Rs. 5,40,500/- vide commercial invoice dt. 6-6-2015. It is high speed CNC router machine for carving and making various required designs professionally on the wood, especially on dooers. The machine will work with NC studio controller system. The software used in the machine is ‘Artcam Pro’ for designing the carvings. The weight of the machine will be done tone approximately.
4. It is submitted that this machine was transported through vehicle No. AP 04 CW 158 vide way bill No. 371506069404822, dt. 6-6-2015 and safely installed on 17-6-2015 in the rented place of the Complainant i.e. quick wood carving room No. 15, Market Yard Complex, Devuni Kadapa Road, kadapa by the personnel and technicians of opposite party and test run was also conducted. As suggested by the opposite party, the Complainant from his own funds, has purchased (a)UPS batteries Amaran qunat Nos. 15 of 42 Ah/12V and No. 1 online ups of 5 KVA, from M/s Amardip electrical solutions, Kadapa for a sum of Rs. 1,08,250/-, dt. 17-6-2015 and 2 numbers computers i.e. (b) one from M/s Raj Computers, sales and service, proddatur in Kadapa district, vide bill No. 151, dt. 17-6-2015 fro Rs. 14,000/- and (c) another computer from M/s Expert system and software, Kadapa vide bill No. 331, dt. 18-6-2015 for Rs. 28,800/- and (d) mother board and RAM from M/s Raj Computers, proddatur, kadapa District vide bill No. 118, dt. 20-11-2015 for Rs. 2,900/- and these devises also installed and attached to the above said machine by the said technicians of opposite party.
5. It is submitted that the machine is designed in such a way that once the command is given for a particular design and set it in motion, it will automatically go on carving the wood and complete the particular design on the wood in a limited time and thus everything will be done automatically by the machine without any interference of any person / carpenter / operator and complete the required design on the wood without any demur. Basing on the design, the time to complete the carving work will be 4 hours, 6 hours, or 7 hours etc., and the machine will not stop will completion of the particular design. Then only the carving on the wood will come in esthetic way. If the machine stops working in the middle due to any reason, the design will get spoiled and the carving will be damaged and finally the carving will look defective and the same will be rejected by the customer ultimately. Thus, uninterrupted power supply to the machine will be very important and that it the reason the UPS was purchased by the claimant as suggested by the opposite party. As claimed by the opposite party this is the special characteristic of the machine. This characteristic of the machine has attracted the Complainant and prompted him to purchase the said machine of the opposite party.
6. After installation the technician of the opposite party one Mr. Harsha has given training to the Complainant from 18-6-2015 to 24-6-2015 and left the palce. After completion of installation and training, the Complainant gave campaign in kadapa town and nearby villages, towns in a big way about the machine and its specialty, this is the only machine of this kind available in Kadapa town and nearby villages. Thus this Complainant expected a good business after its installation basing on the specialty of the machine and his personal contracts in the area. The Complainant further submits that after training and 10 days of campaign, the Complainant got his first order for carving of “Lord Ganesh” on a door. With happy mood and expecting a good bright future, since he got to start with carving of lord ganesh, when he started carving work, to his utter dismay the machine abruptly stopped several times for unknown reasons. However, in consolation with this opposite party Mr. Ramesh Vemula, over phone this Complainant tried to sort out the problem and somehow completed the first assignment however after wasting the teak wood costing of Rs. 8,000/- on which he first started the carving work. Thus the Complainant could able to finish his first assignment after spending Rs. 8,000/- from his pocket for purchase of another piece of teak wood for completing the assignment as the first one was spoiled. Thus the Complainant earned Rs. 3,500/- on his first assignment however incurred a net loss of Rs. 4,500/-.
7. The Complainant further submits that with great difficulty he completed another two assignments like designs on cot frames etc., with same type of troubles and was unable to fix the problem. During the end of August, 2015 this Complainant has got big order of carving work for 10 doors on teak wood. He could be able to finish 3 doors with great difficulty which consumed 10 days which is considered as abnormal delay because as per specifications of the machine the carving work on one door should complete within 4 to 5 hours. As suggested by this opposite party during discussions over team viewer, to fix the problem, this Complainant has purchased and got installed new mother board worth of Rs. 3,000/- and RAM worth of Rs. 900/- in the computer. However, since, the problem still exists even after changing the mother board, it is proved beyond doubt that the problem was not with motherboard or the software and or with the computer. At this juncture, since the machine is not working the circumstances forced by the Complainant to cancel the other orders and returned the wood doors to his customers.
7. It is humbly submitted that the machine was totally stopped working and after lot of persuasions, follow up and requests this opposite party has visited the machine on 8-12-2015 and however was unable to find out the exact problem and left the place on the next day without giving any information about what he is going to do to solve the problem. After prolonged persuasion, the opposite party has sent 2 spare parts for replacement (i) spindle (ii) one cable (iii) NC Studio card by ANL parcel service vide the letter dt. 12-12-2015 along with commercial invoice and the Complainant was asked to replace them for which this Complainant refused to do as he is not familiar with the machine and its parts and requested to send technician. This opposite party sent another technician Mr. Sandeep Kumar, who visited the machine on 26-1-2016 and installed the above parts and after 3 days continuous trials utterly failed to make the machine working condition. Finally, on 29-1-2016 on the advice of opposite party the technician Mr. Sandeep Kumar had removed those newly installed parts and left the place and endorsement was made by the technician on the back side of Annexure 8.
8. It is submitted that in view of above circumstances, this opposite party is unable to find out the exact problem in the machine. He has removed and replace the mother board, changed the software and replace certain spare parts but utterly failed to make the machine working. It is needless to prove that this opposite party supplied the defective / inferior quality machine by charging such a huge amount. Even after several attempts, changing several spare parts, changing the mother board, software etc., the opposite party utterly failed to find out the exact problem in the machine and made the machine in working condition even after 6 months of supply. In the above circumstances it is needless to prove that this opposite party supplied the defective machinery by charging such a huge amount. It is submitted that with great difficulty the Complainant could be able to talk to the opposite party over phone on 30-1-2016 and explained to him all the mental agony, business loss being faced after investing such huge amount of more than Rs. 10,00,000/-. The bitter experience faced and requested him to find out a solution and sort out the problem or to take back the defective machine by supplying a new one since the machine is still in warranty period. But the Complainant request is proved futile. This opposite party is not even lifting the pone and if attended the phone call started telling dilly and dally stories behaved highhandedness.
9. It is submitted that due to failure of the machine, the Complainant has lost and continue to loss an average monthly net income of Rs. 50,000/- with monthly turnover of Rs. 80,000/- this Complainant has lost all his orders in business. The Complainant got issued legal notice dt. 01-2-2016 to this opposite party demanding for supply and replace with good machine in the place of defective machine immediately or eels to refund the invoice amount of Rs. 6,40,000/- and also to pay loss of Rs. 9,58,000/- for mental agony and other miscellaneous loss and cost of wood and also to pay interest at the rate of 24% p.a. on the above amount payable. But on 8-2-2016 O.P. has given letter evasively again throwing blames on the Complainant that shop was closed when visited the shop. Again Complainant got issued legal notice dt. 13-2-2016 through Regd. Post with acknowledgement not only giving derailed explanation but also denying the mendacious allegations made in the letter of the opposite party. However, the opposite party has sent a reply notice dt. 20-2-2016 by attributing the defects to the computer such as mother board and RAM and not to the machine. In fact, it is on the sugg3estion and advice of opposite party, the mother board and RAM are replaced in the computer though the technical persons of the opposite party. Even after replacement of mother board and RAM as suggested by him, the opposite party and his technical person were unable to make the machine in working conditions and could not find the defects in the machine. In fact the old mother board and RAM are also in working condition. It is also a fact that he was unsuccessful to make the machine to work by replacing his software and card in the place of old ones, the opposite party has replaced his software and card for 3 times but utterly failed even to find the defects in the machine. With the above, it is undoubtedly proved that the defects faults are in the machine only, but not in the computer, mother board and RAM.
10. The Hon’ble forum may be pleased to pass order directing the Opposite party to supply and replace with good quality machine in good working condition with good quality accessories in the place of defective machine immediately as warranty period is in force or directing the opposite party to pay the invoice amount of Rs. 6,40,000/- with interest at 24% p.a. and (b) direct the opposite party to pay loss of Rs. 9,58,000/- towards loss of business, mental agony cost of teak wood wasted, purchase of motherboard and RAM and other miscellaneous expenses and (c) directing the opposite party to pay the cost of litigation of Rs. 50,000/- and other cots if any.
11. Written version filed by the Opposite party. The most of the material allegations in the consumer case filed by the Complainant are not true and correct and therefore, the Complainant is put to strict proof of all such allegations that are not specifically admitted herein by the Opposite party. The consumer case filed by the Complainant is neither maintainable at law nor in equity and thereof, liable to be dismissed at the threshold. The Complainant had admittedly purchased the machinery for a commercial purpose and therefore, the consumer case filed by the ocm is beyond the purview and jurisdiction of the Hon’ble forum and as such ought to be rejected at the threshold.
12. The allegations and averments advanced by the ocm stating that he is the resident of Kogatam village of Kamalapuram Mandal in Kadapa district of Andhra Pradesh, that he is doing the wood carpentry designing work in kadapa town that he is a graduate, that he is started this business under self employment programme scheme, that he has invested money borrowing from money lenders, that he hails from agricultural family, etc., are beyond the knowledge of understanding of the opposite party and therefore denied by him. Hence, the onus to prove and substantiate all such contentions would squarely lie on the Complainant himself for the apparent reason that they are within his exclusive knowledge.
13. The further allegation leveled by the Complainant starting that he had purchased CNC Router machine (Model CY-1325C) worthy of Rs. 6,40,500/- vide the commercial invoice dt. 6-6-2015 that it is high speed CNC router machine for caring and making various required designs professionally on the wood especially on doors that the machine will work with NC studio controller system that the software used in the machine is “Artcam Pro” for designing the carving that the weight of the machine will be one ton approximately etc., are deliberately distorted, twisted and misrepresented by the Complainant to suit credibility and reliability to his make believe story. The Complainant to understand about all the features and characters of the machine in order to enable him to exercise his informed choice of purchase. The Opposite parties had even brought to the notice and knowledge of the Complainant that the successful operation and working of the machine sold and supplied by him would depend upon the Complainant was advised to purchase and computer with definite specifications but which were intentionally ignored by the Complainant.
14. The further allegations raised by the Complainant stating that the machine was transported through vehicle No. AP 04 CW158 vide way bill No. 37506069404822, dt. 6-6-2015 and safely installed on 17-6-2015 in the rented place of the claimant i.e. quick wood carving R.No. 15, market yard complex, Devuni Kadapa Road, Kadapa by the personnel and technicians of the opposite party and test run was also conducted, that as suggested by the opposite party, the Complainant from his won funds has purchased (a)UPS batteries Amaran qunat Nos. 15 of 42 Ah/12V and No. 1 online ups of 5 KVA, from M/s Amardip electrical solutions, Kadapa for a sum of Rs. 1,08,250/-, dt. 17-6-2015 and 2 numbers computers i.e. (b) one from M/s Raj Computers, sales and service, proddatur in Kadapa district, vide bill No. 151, dt. 17-6-2015 fro Rs. 14,000/- and (c) another computer from M/s Expert system and software, Kadapa vide bill No. 331, dt. 18-6-2015 for Rs. 28,800/- and (d) mother board and RAM from M/s Raj Computers, proddatur, kadapa District vide bill No. 118, dt. 20-11-2015 for Rs. 3,900/- and these devises also installed and attached to the above said machine by the said technicians of opposite party are mis-represented and disstarted by the Complainant with an ulterior motive of establishing a false cause of action against the opposite party to gain illegally at his expense. The Complainant did not purchased a CNC Router machine Model CY-1325C worth of Rs. 6,40,500/- vide the commercial invoice dt. 6-6-2015 from his after exercising his informed choice basing on the full and complete information provided by none other than the party herein. The Complainant was made to understand by none other than the opposite party that the machine purchased by him act as per the commands given by the desk top computer and therefore, the Complainant was advised to purchase a computer with definite specifications but which were intentionally ignored by the Complainant and because of which only the machine sold and supplied by the opposite party has been developing recurring problem of the same type and the same was time and again brought to the notice knowledge and understanding of the Complainant. The desk computer purchased and installed at the place of the workshop of at Complainant was not sold and supplied by the opposite party and therefore, any problem originating from the computer leading to the development of technical snags in the machine can never be constructed by any stretch of interpretations as the defects emanating from the machine sold and supplied by the opposite party. In fact, the Complainant had opted for the purchase of the imported china machine after fully and thoroughly satisfying himself with its live demonstration and information contained in the customer brochure. The opposite parity has never mis-represented any fact either material or immaterial at any point of time in regard to the features and working of the machine. The O.P. has never given any assurance or promises either oral or written for promoting and securing good business and adequate number of customers to the Complainant in order enable the Complainant to gain profits on the said machine purchased by him. On the contrary, the opposite party had made himself very clear and categorical to the Complainant at the inception itself that it is his exclusive job to promote his business for securing work orders and getting adequate number of customers for earning profits on the machinery. The Complainant cannot be allowed to reproach the opposite party for his inability to generate work orders and further in securing adequate number of costumers for gaining profits on the working of the machinery. In fact the Complainant having realized his inability and incapacity to remote business of wood carvings and designing due to his poor market strategy and myopic approach has come out with distorted, twisted and mis-represented facts to start the blame from himself to the machinery for extracting ransom from the opposite party.
15. Further allegations advanced by the Complainant stating that the machine is designed in such a way that once the command is given for a particular design and set it in motion, it will automatically go on carving the wood and complete the particular design on the wood in a limited time and thus everything will be done automatically by the machine without any interference of any person / carpenter / operator and complete the required design on the wood without any demur. Basing on the design, the time to complete the carving work will be 4 hours, 6 hours, or 7 hours etc., and the machine will not stop will completion of the particular design. Then only the carving on the wood will come in esthetic way. If the machine stops working in the middle due to any reason, the design will get spoiled and the carving will be damaged and finally the carving will look defective and the same will be rejected by the customer ultimately. Thus, uninterrupted power supply to the machine will be very important and that it the reason the UPS was purchased by the claimant as suggested by the opposite party. As claimed by the opposite party this is the special characteristic of the machine. This characteristic of the machine has attracted the Complainant and prompted him to purchase the said machine of the opposite party etc., are wantonly invented by the Complainant to establish a false and fanciful cause of action against the O.P. with an ulterior motive of gaining illegally and amorally at the expense of the O.P. the O.P. had appraised the Complainant about the full and complete information about the modus operandi of the working and functioning of the machine including the need to install a desktop computer under the supervision of a skilled person endowed with commensurate knowledge and dexterity for feeding accurate data into the machine for generating the expected output. In spite of all this the Complainant has been wantonly feigning and pretending ignorance of all these facts and factualities for creating a false cause of action against the opposite party. The opposite party made the Complainant to understand prior to exercise of his informed purchasing decision in regard to the machinery that the machinery doesn’t work on its own and further it always work with the networking of the desk computer only and further it is sole responsibility of the Complainant to arrange and install computers with given specifications and a computer savvy technician.
16. The further allegation leveled by the Complainant stating that after training and 10 days of campaign, the Complainant got his first order for carving of “Lord Ganesh” on a door. With happy mood and expecting a good bright future, since he got to start with carving of lord ganesh, when he started carving work, to his utter dismay the machine abruptly stopped several times for unknown reasons. However, in consolation with this opposite party Mr. Ramesh Vemula, over phone this Complainant tried to sort out the problem and somehow completed the first assignment however after wasting the teak wood costing of Rs. 8,000/- on which he first started the carving work. Thus the Complainant could able to finish his first assignment after spending Rs. 8,000/- from his pocket for purchase of another piece of teak wood for completing the assignment as the first one was spoiled. Thus the Complainant earned Rs. 3,500/- on his first assignment however incurred a net loss of Rs. 4,500/- are absolutely false and wantonly invented by the Complainant to lend credibility and reliability to his cock and bull story.
17. The further allegations that even after several attempts, changing several spare parts, changing the mother board, software etc., the opposite party utterly failed to find out the exact problem in the machine and make the machine in working condition even after 6 months of supply, that in the above circumstances it is needless to prove that this opposite party supplied the defective machine by charging such a huge amount that with great difficulty the Complainant could be able to talk to the O.P. over pone on 30-1-2016 and explained to him and the mental agony, business loss being faced after investing such huge amount of more than Rs. 10,00,000/- the bitter experience faced and requested him to find out a solution and sort out the problem or to take back the defective machine by supplying a new one since the machine is still in warranty period. But the Complainant request is proved futile. This opposite party is not even lifting the pone and if attended the phone call started telling dilly and dally stories behaved highhandedness etc., are absolutely false.
18. The further allegations raised by the Complainant stating that the O.P. with mala fide intention to gain wrongfully had supplied defective machine, that his complete negligence behavior his utter failure to identify the defect, to provide technical support as part and after sales service amounts to cheating that squeezing such huge amount from this Complainant in unscrupulous in nature and doubts have arisen about trustworthiness of the O.P. that the O.P. cheated the Complainant by supplying defective machine by taking such a huge amount of money which amounts to criminal breach of trust etc., are also not true and correct. The O.P. is still ready and willing to demonstrate to the Complainant that the fault is not in the machine but due to adamant and non cooperative attitude of the Complainant the O.P. could not succeed in his efforts. Had the Complainant allowed the O.P. to allow the inspection of the machine when he visited the place of the workshop of the Complainant at Kadapa more than once then the O.P. would have definitely demonstrated that there is absolutely no flaw or fault in machinedry. The Complainant has not demonstrated by any means as to his contention of defects in the machine and therefore, O.P. is ready and willing to prove that the machinery sold and supplied by him to the Complainant is defect free provided a chance is given to him by the Hon’ble forum. The further allegations that due to failure of the machine the Complainant has lost and continue to loss an average monthly net income of Rs. 50,000/- with monthly turnover of Rs. 80,000/- Complainant has loss all his orders in the business since then etc., are also not true and correct and therefore, denied and disputed by the O.P.
19. In the light of afore stated submission, this O.P. humbly prays that the Hon’ble forum may be pleased to disallow and dismiss the consumer case filed by the Complainant as it absolutely sans any merits and further award costs and furthermore, grant such reliefs as the Hon’ble forum are just and proper.
20. On the basis of the above pleadings the following points are settled for determination.
- Whether the complainant is eligible for compensation as prayed by him or not?
ii. Whether there is negligence or deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party or not?
iii. To what relief?
21. On behalf of complainant Exs. A1 to A19 were marked and on behalf Respondent Exs. B1 to B6 were marked.
22. Point Nos. 1 & 2. It is very clear from exhibits filed by the Complainant and opposite party that the Complainant had purchased a machine from opposite party and opposite party had given training which is technician to the Complainant. But as seen from complaint filed by the Complainant he started business under Self Employment programme scheme. All the machinery supplied by the opposite party for commercial use only. The Complainant he himself stated that he had business loss due to defective machine. As the Complainant itself stating that the machine was brought for business purpose. This is not right forum to file this case. So the Complainant is not eligible for any compensation as prayed by him. At the same time there is no deficiency of service or negligence on the part of the opposite party.
23. Point No. 3. In the result the complaint is dismissed without costs.
Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by him, corrected and pronounced by us in the open Forum, this the 8th September 2016.
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
Witnesses examined.
For Complainant : NIL For Respondents : NIL
Exhibits marked for Complainant: -
Ex: A1 Original copy of the Commercial Invoice, Dt. 6-6-2015 from M/s Datta
Universal Technologies.
Ex: A2 Original copy of Way Bill Dated 6-6-2015.
Ex: A3 Original copy of UPS & Batteries Invoice Dated 17-6-2015 from M/s Amardip Electrial Solutions.
Ex: A4 Original copy of Computer Invoice Dated 17-6-2015 from M/s Raj Computers.
Ex: A5 Original Copy of Computer Invoice, Dt. 18-6-2016 from M/s EXPERT
Systems & Software.
Ex: A6 Original copy of Mother Board & Ram Dated 20-11-2015 from M/s Raj
Computers.
Ex: A7 Original copy of Supplier Spare parts sending letter dated 12-12-2015.
Ex: A8 Original copy of Enclosure of S. No.7, Dated 12-12-2015.
Ex: A9 Photo copy of Endorsement given by Technician, Dated 29-1-2016.
Ex: A10 Original copy of Legal Notice, Dated 1-2-2016.
Ex: A11 Original copy of Postal Receipt, Dated 2-2-2016.
Ex: A12 Original copy of postal endorsement, dated 4-2-2016.
Ex: A13 Original copy of Supplier Reply Letter dated 8-2-2016.
Ex: A14 Original copy of Legal notice-2, Dated 13-2-2016.
Ex: A15 Original copy of postal receipt dated 15-2-2016.
Ex: A16 Original copy of postal endorsement dated 18-2-2016.
Ex: A17 Original copy of supplier reply through advocate dated 20-2-2016.
Ex: A18 Original Bank voucher, Dt. 27-5-2015 from S.B.I., Kadapa.
Ex: A19 Original bank receipt dated 27-5-2015 from IDBI, Bank.
Exhibits marked on behalf of the Respondents : -
Ex:B1 Commercial invoice issued by the opposite party in regard to sale and supply of the machinery containing terms and conditions of the sale, Dt.6-6-2015.
Ex:B2 Letter addressed by the opposite party to the complainant in response to his non Co-operative attitude along with proof of postage along with postal receipt, Dt. 8-2-16.
Ex:B3 Train ticket booked by the opposite party for reaching kadapa to address the grievance of the complainant, Dt. 7-2-2016.
Ex:B4 Lodge Bills incurred by the opposite party in regard to his stay at kadapa,
Dt. 8-2-2016.
Ex:B5 Complaint lodged by the opposite party against complainant for harassing and pestering tactics, dt. 8-2-2016.
Ex:B6 Receipt of the complaint issued by kadapa II town police station in regard to the complaint lodged by the opposite party, Dt. 8-2-2016.
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
Copy to :-
- Sri P.V. Ramana Reddy, Advocate for Complainant
- Mr. Ramesh Vemula, Proprietor of Sri Datta
Universal Telechonologies, (High Speed Routers
CNC Manufacturers), # 52, Near Navata Transport
Head Office Beside VRL Godowns,
Auto Nagar to Kanuru Road, Vijayawada – 520 007 (AP).
Krishna District
B.V.P.
