C.B. RAMACHANDRA REDDY Vs. KAMALA DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE 1st opposite party in C.O.P. No. 47/2000 on the file of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Udhagamandalam, is the appellant herein. The facts lie in a very narrow compass.

(2.) THE opposite party supplied high density Polyethylene pipes and other materials to the complainants for the purpose of irrigating their tea nursery for which the complainants had spent Rs. 3,51,000. When a trial run of irrigation was started by using the pipes supplied by the 1st opposite party, the pipes started breaking and due to that the complainants could not use the pipes. Alleging that the opposite party No. 1 had supplied inferior quality of pipes, the complaint came to be filed claiming compensation of Rs. 75,000 for cost of pipes and Rs. 50,000 towards mental agony suffered by the complainants.

(3.) THE opposite party filed a version stating that the complainants had not obtained permission from the forest authorities for getting water from the forest and the bank authorities who lent loan for purchase of the pipes had not followed the norms while sanctioning the said loan amount. Apart from that the complainants had kept the pipes in direct sun light for months together and the complainants also never attempted to prove the quality of the pipes.