RAJESH Vs. TRILOKI RAGHUBANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition has been filed by the petitioner Dr. Rajesh and Anr., challenging the order dated 14.07.2008 passed by the Uttar Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Lucknow in first appeal No. 472 of 1999.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are that on 17.07.1994, the complainant has purchased a Photostat machine for self-employment from opposite party no.2 (proprietor of opposite party no.1) and opposite party no.3 is the manufacturer of the said machine. The cost of the said machine paid by the complainant was Rs.98,000/- by taking loan from the bank and the opposite party no.2 has given guarantee of three months of the said machine which was effective from 01.08.1994 to 31.10.1994. On 07.08.1994, the said machine went out of order. It is alleged that opposite party no.1 did not turn up to repair the machine despite repeated reminders from the complainant.

(3.) On 28.10.1994, the complainant has initially filed a consumer complaint before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Varanasi ('the District Forum') which was withdrawn on 27.08.1996 on the ground that the District Forum Varanasi was not having the territorial jurisdiction to entertain the said complaint. On 31.08.1996, the complainant has filed a fresh Consumer Complaint no. CC/1019/1996 before the District Forum, Allahabad (as the petitioner was residing at Allahabad District) seeking price of the machine, i.e., Rs.98,000/- with interest @ 18% per annum + Rs.50,000/- as compensation. Notice issued to the opposite parties received back 'undelivered', thereafter, the complainant served the opposite parties through publication in the local newspaper 'Nyayadish', but the opposite parties did not turn up.