LAWS(NCD)-2020-1-24

LAXMAN A. TEKWANI Vs. GANESH

Decided On January 06, 2020
Laxman A. Tekwani Appellant
V/S
GANESH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition has been filed by the petitioner Laxman A.Tekwani against the order dated 27.7.2017 of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Maharashtra, (in short 'the State Commission') passed in First Appeal No.839 of 2016.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that the respondent No.1/complainant on 29.11.2014 purchased a fridge wide receipt no.343 for an amount of Rs.13,700/- from the petitioner manufactured by respondent No.2. It was told to the complainant that it had two years' warranty. On 8.11.2015, the complainant's fridge suddenly exploded and blasted with a huge sound. After giving information about the incident to fire brigade and police station Beed, they tried to extinguish the fire. After the incident, the police officer, Tahsildar, Gramsevak, Talathi have prepared panchnama. On 09.11.2015, the panchnama was drawn in presence of the Technician of the respondent company. On 17.11.2015, the respondent company prepared job sheet and issued report thereof along with photographs of the refrigerator showing the compressor intact. On 01.12.2015, lastly the complainant issued notice to the respondent No.2 and the petitioner through his advocate. On 02.01.2016, the complainant has filed the present complaint and claimed the loss of Rs.7,00,000/- caused due to the blast alongwith18% p.a.interest thereon. The District Forum, Beed allowed the consumer complaint No.2/2016 by judgment and order dated 13.07.2016. On 16.08.2016, the respondent No.2 company filed first appeal No.839 of 2016 before the State Commission. On 18.01.2017, the petitioner filed cross-objection before the State Commission. On 27.07.2017, the State Commission dismissed the cross-objection and allowed the appeal of the respondent No.2/ the manufacturer company.

(3.) Hence the revision petition.