MOHAN LAL Vs. PEST CONTROL (INDIA) LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE complaint of the appellant seeking refund of Rs. 6,000/ - and compensation of Rs. 22,000/ - on account of deficiency in service in not providing the termite treatment of good quality was dismissed vide impugned order dated 9.9.2002 passed by District Forum.

(2.) THE case of the appellant in brief is that on 13.12.1997 he entered into 5 years contract with the respondent company for termite treatment of his residence and paid Rs. 6,000/ - vide receipt dated 15.12.1997. As per agreement, the respondent was to conduct one major treatment followed by one routine checkup every year. The respondent also assured the appellant that termite treatment would be so effective that there would be no problem of termites. However, the treatment was not effective as the appellant approached the respondent time and again and as many as seven complaints were made in the period of 20 months.

(3.) AS against this, the case of the respondent is that agreement was entered into between the parties on 15.12.1997 and not on 13.12.1997 and as per the terms of contract, the respondent was to render treatment as and when recurrence of termite was reported by the appellant and in the instant case, the recurrence was reported time and again because of the seepage and moisture in the walls and floor and the appellant was advised to first remove the seepage and moisture so as to make the treatment effective and worthwhile.