ALLIED PHOTOGRAPHICS INDIA LIMITED Vs. HARISCHANDRA U SALGAONKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appeal was taken up for admission. The appellant assails the order dated 22.11.2007 passed by Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (District Forum) South Goa in Complaint No. 38/2004 whereby he was directed to refund to the respondent an amount of Rs. 30,000 paid against the cost of photo system along with interest @ 18% p.a. and further amounts of Rs. 31,166 towards cost of material, Rs. 14,650 being cost of flash light bulbs and compensation/damages of Rs. 6,000, the latter amounts not carrying any interest. The respondent is the original complainant.

(2.) AT the outset we shall deal with the appellant's applicationfor condonation of delay. The appellant submits that he received copy of the order from the District Forum by registered post on 10.12.2007 and could not file the appeal within time as he had to come down from Mumbai, etc. However, it is seen from the records that the appeal was filed on 7.1.2008, which squarely falls within the thirty -day limitation period.

(3.) TURNING to the dispute, in a nutshell, it is the case of the respondent/complainant that had purchased a 'Sterling Photo Quick Camera Assembly', a 2 -minute photo system from the appellant/opposite party on 6.7.2001 for total consideration of Rs. 75,000. An amount of Rs.20,000 was paid on taking delivery of the machine and balance was payable in instalments on its satisfactory performance. Within six months of purchase, the photo system went out of order and developed manufacturing defect. The appellants/opposite party's technician found some parts burnt inside along with major damage and assured to do the needful but failed to do so. Even after installation of flash bulbs, the performance of the system did not improve causing the respondent/ complainant to ask the appellant/opposite party to take back the items and refund all amounts paid. The respondent/ complainant then issued a letter dated 12.4.2002 to the appellant/opposite party inter alia calling upon him to refund the amounts along with compensation. The respondent/complainant's reputation in the business was affected on account of the poor quality of impressions of the photo system. He sought direction to the appellant/opposite party to refund the amounts paid along with 18% interest and for compensation of Rs. 20,000.