PAULRAJ Vs. COMMISSIONER, AVADI MUNICIPALITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) FROM the facts it is clear that the 1st opposite party supplied six fogging machines for which they received a sum of Rs. 1,20,000/ - on 19.2.1997. It is no doubt true that the opposite party did not use the fogging machine immediately but they were kept in the stores for some time and as soon as they got the required chemical the machinery was put to use on 9.6.1997. At that time they found that the machine was defective and did not produce the necessary spray. Immediately they made a complaint to the opposite parties thereafter issued notice to the opposite parties. The opposite parties promised to set right the machine and make them work properly. They also represented that they have supplied some such machines to Alandur Municipality and they were working properly. The learned Counsel appearing for the appellant contended that they have kept the machines without use for more than six months. Therefore, if at all there is any defect, it has been caused on account of their not putting the machine to use. They further contended that it is impossible to accept the complainant s case that they did not use it for six months and on the other hand they ought to have used it for six months. The complainant s case is that the necessary chemicals required for use in the machine was not available and they have to obtain it by way of tender and, therefore, it was that they could not use it and kept it in stores for some time. This explanation is quite acceptable and we do not find any reason to hold that it is in any manner odd. Moreover, even assuming that they had used the machine for six months, the fact that they had chosen to complain later cannot absolve the opposite parties from their liability. The complaint is made within one year of purchase. The opposite parties have received more than Rs. 1,00,000/ -. If the machine did not work, whether immediately or after some time, still, there will be deficiency in service. Therefore, the opposite parties are liable.

(2.) IN fine, we do not find any merit in the submissions of the appellants.

(3.) IN the result, this appeal is dismissed, but in the circumstances without costs. The order of the lower Forum is confirmed.