HCL LIMITED Vs. AJAI KUMAR ALYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appeal No.330/sc/1995 has been filed against the judgment and order dated 10.11.1994 passed by District Consumer Forum, Lalipur in Complaint Case No.104/1994. Briefly stated the facts of the case are as follows.

(2.) The complainant Ajay Kumar Alya had purchased one photocopier machine on 20.4.1990 at a price of Rs.49,995/- from the opposite party, M/s. HCL Limited. The photocopier machine so purchased was for self-employment of the complainant and financing was done from the Bank as loan. The complainant had also entered into an agreement with the opposite party No.1 through which a service contract for the machine was taken from the opposite party No.1 for a period of three years commencing from 26.10.1991 to 25.10.1994. For the service contract a sum of Rs.20,000/- was paid by the complainant to opposite party No.1 through the Bank on 30.9.1991. As per terms of the service contract the Engineer of the opposite party was required to service the machine and replace the spare parts like electronic board, panel, gears etc. free of cost. During the period of the service contract of three years the Service Engineer of the opposite party did not come from time to time with the result that there was deficiency in service and the complainant had to go to Jhansi time and again to lodge complaint to the opposite party No.5, who is the agent of opposite party No.1 at Jhansi. The other opposite parties at Lucknow, Agra and Gwalior were also informed from time to time.

(3.) On 8.2.1994 when there was break down of the machine opposite party No.5 at Jhansi was informed. On 12.2.1994 the Service Engineer of opposite party No.1 came to Lalitpur and found that the machine cannot be started. The Engineer went away after promising that he will return with spare parts but he never returned. On 21.2.1994 another Engineer, Ghan Shyam came to the workshop of the complainant but did not bring any spare parts like M. C. Relay and after three hours he went back and advised the complainant to change the remaining parts of the machine, after giving a report that the machine is totally stopped. Thereafter none came from opposite party. This resulted into financial loss and mental torture to the complainant and from 8.4.1994 to 29.4.1994 he was put to a loss of Rs.200/- per day which comes to Rs.16,000/-.