DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, PATIALA.

Consumer Complaint No.234 of 27/06/2018 Decided on: 12/09/2019

Lakhwinder Singh Virk son of Sh. Gurcharan Singh, aged about 53 years, Resident of village Amampur Khalifewala, Post Office Chailaila, Tehsil & District Patiala.

                                                                                               ….Complainant

                                      Versus

OSAKA INTERNATIONAL INC, G-53, FF, South City-ii, Gurgaon (Gurugram), Haryana-122001 through its authorized signatory/ Managing Director.

                                                                                              ….Opposite party

Complaint U/S 11 to 14 of the Consumer Protection Act.

QUORUM

Smt. Inderjeet Kaur, Member

Sh. B. S. Dhaliwal, Member

ARGUED BY:

Sh. M. L. Sharma Adv. counsel for the complainant.

Opposite party ex-parte.

ORDER

B. S. DHALIWAL, MEMBER

1. This complaint is filed by Lakhwinder Singh (here-in-after referred as complainant) u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 (here-in-after referred as Act) against Osaka International Inc. (here-in-after referred as opposite party).

2. Briefly the case of the complainant is that opposite party is dealing with sale of imported manual Rice Transplanter and in the month of May, 2018 complainant after discussion and demo on live video by the OP, telephonically ordered the purchase of two manual Rice Transplanter. The delivery of manual Rice Transplanters was to be made by OP at the residence of complainant. The complainant made the online payment for two manual Rice Transplanters in the bank account of OP from the account of his son namely Jagneet Singh from his account maintained in Standard Charted Bank at Patiala on 21/5/2018.

3. It is contended that OP made the delivery of two manual Rice Transplanters alongwith invoice No.011 dated 5/6/2018 through SPOTON LOGISTICS PVT LTD at the complainant's residence on 5/6/2018. On opening the packing of manual Rice Transplanters complainant was shocked to see that manual Rice Transplanters were in loose condition, some nut bolts were missing and there was no branding on it and looks to be local made. Both Manual Rice Transplanters were totally damaged and not in working condition.

4. It is further alleged that on the same day i.e. 5/6/2018 complainant send the video and photo of manual Rice Transplanters to OP and telephonically asked OP to replace the damaged and un branded manual Rice Transplanter with branded manual Rice Transplanters with working condition as shown in demo. But OP advised the complainant to get it repaired from local mechanic and told that it will not be replaced and also misbehaved with complainant. Due to delivery of defective manual Rice Transplanters and non replacement of the same by OP the complainant had to hire the labour for rice transplantation and incurred expenses about more than Rs.20000/-

5. It is also alleged that the act of the OP amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice for which complainant has suffered harassment and mental agony.

6. In the sequel of these facts, the complainant has filed the complaint with the following prayer:-

i) To replace the two local made manual Rice Transplanters with branded or to return the amount of Rs.40,000/- received for the same.

ii) To pay compensation to the tune of Rs.50,000/- on account of deficiency in service and unfair trade practice.

iii) To pay Rs.7700/- as the cost and litigation charges to the complainant.

7. Notice was given to the OP. None appeared on his behalf, as such, was proceeded against ex-parte.

8. Ld. Counsel for the complainant provided opportunity to adduce evidence.

9. In support of the case of the complainant, ld. Counsel for the complainant tendered in to evidence Ex.C-1 affidavit of the complainant along with documents Ex.C-2 copy of bank Statement, Ex.C-3 copy of Invoice, Ex.C-4 copy of transportation, Ex.C-5 Copy of Web Address and closed the evidence. However subsequently with the permission of this Forum, Ld. Counsel for the complainant tendered additional evidence Ex.C-6 to Ex.C-9 photographs of the defective equipments, Ex.C-10 & Ex.C-11 Expert certificate/ report and affidavit of M/s Gurbaz Agriculture works, Ex.C-12 & Ex.C-13 copies of whatsapp video received by the OPs Sales Manager and closed the additional evidence.

10. We have carefully perused the complaint, gone through the evidence produced on the file and heard the arguments addressed by the ld. Counsel for the complainant.

11. It is an admitted fact that the complainant has purchased the two manual Rice Transplanters from the OP on 5/6/2018 for an amount of Rs.40000/- vide invoice ( Ex.C-3). The said Rice Transplanters were delivered to the complainant and this fact is substantiated by bilty bill Ex.C-4. The salient features have been described web add. Ex.C-5. The defects in the Rice Transplanters are proved by the photographs Ex.C-6 to Ex.C-9 and further authenticated by the report of an expert Ex.C-10 which is also supported by his affidavit Ex.C-11. Conversation between the complainant and the OP regarding replacement etc. is established by Ex.C-12.

13. The record shows that the Rice Transplanters purchased by the complainant from OP had inherant defects and were not in working condition from day one of their delivery. This fact is corroborated by the report of expert (Ex.C-10). The photographs of the equipments in question also testifies the correctness of contentions made in the complaint. The OP failed to ratify the defects. The facts speaks volumes of the bad quality of the Rice Transplanters and unfit for use. It further shows that the Rice Transplanters were not in working conditions due to technical / manufacturing faults. It clearly amounts to sale of defective goods.

14. When the complainant had approached the OP for the replacement, OP should have accepted the request of the complainant and not driven the complainat to file the present complaint. It could have avoid unnecessary harassment and mental torture to him.

15. The whole purpose of pleading in to give fair notice to each party of which the opponent's case is and to ascertain with precision the point(s) on which the parties agree and those on which they differ. The purpose is to eradicate irrelevancy. The complaint is a concise statement of facts and if no reply is filed to the complaint, the averments made there are deemed to have been admitted. No amount of proof can substitute pleadings, which are the foundation of the claim of the parties. The opposite party did not appear before this Forum despite service and presumption of service was raised and it was proceeded against ex-parte. Thus, the evidence adduced by the complainant remains unrebutted. In view of this all the averments made in the complaint are deemed to have been admitted by the opposite party and no adverse inference is to be drawn against it. More over the contention of the complainant are supported by sworn affidavit and there is no reason to dis-believe them.

16. Thus allowing the complaint, we direct the OP either to replace the Rice Transplanters as prayed for by the complainant or to refund the price i.e. Rs.40,000/- along with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of purchase till payment with other sum of Rs.5000/- as compensation inclusive of cost for causing harassment, inconvenience and mental torture and litigation expenses within a period of 45 days from the date of the receipt of the copy of the order. In case of refund, the complainant has to hand over the machinery in question to the opposite party.

17. The complaint could not be decided in the stipulated period due to heavy pendency of cases.

18. Certified copy of this order be sent to the parties free of costs under the rules. Thereafter file be indexed and consigned.

PRONOUNCED

DATED: 12/09/2019

                              B. S. DHALIWAL                                INDERJEET KAUR

                                        MEMBER                                               MEMBER