ANAND BAHUGUNA Vs. PRITUL MACHINERY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two appeals arise out of the order dated 29.7.2009 passed by the District Forum, Dehradun, in Consumer Complaint No. 27/ 2007, whereby the District Forum has partly allowed the consumer complaint and has directed the opposite parties to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs. 5,36,000 after taking back the Oven, Spiral Mixer and Slicer.

(2.) THE facts of the case, in brief, are that the complainant Shri Anand Bahuguna purchased an oven along with its auxiliary machinery from M/s. Pritul Machinery, near Jain Inter College, Prempuri, Muzaffarnagar and M/s. Triloper Machine, Engineers and Fabricators, K -5, Industrial Area, Beerajpur, Muzaffarnagar - opposite parties on 27.10.2005 for Rs. 6,30,000 for bakery business. Within a month after starting the bakery work, the complainant alleged that the burners of the oven stopped working and its fans also became defective. Though, on making a complaint, the opposite parties repaired the oven, but the oven failed to bake the goods perfectly. Besides the defective oven, the spiral mixer supplied by the opposite parties had a capacity of less than 30 kg instead of 45 kg as claimed by the opposite parties. The complainant has also alleged that the opposite parties had supplied the slicer and biscuit machine at a much higher price than the market price of these items. The complainant tried initially to get the oven and allied machinery exchanged with a new one, but in spite of assurances, the opposite parties did not supply the new machine. When the opposite parties did not reply to the notice sent by the complainant through his Counsel, the complainant filed a consumer complaint before the District Forum, Dehradun. The District Forum, vide its order dated 29.7.2009, partly allowed the consumer complaint in the above manner. Aggrieved by the order, the opposite parties and the complainant both have filed these two appeals. The complainant has filed a First Appeal No. 154/2009 challenging theorder impugned on the ground that the amount awarded by the District Forum is inadequate. The First Appeal No. 156/2009 has been filed by the opposite parties challenging the impugned order on the ground that the oven does not suffer from any manufacturing defect and, therefore, the impugned order is liable to be set aside.

(3.) WE have heard the learned Counsel for the parties and perused the material placed on record.