SANJEEV KUMAR MATHUR Vs. FINE FABRICATION WORKS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal against the judgment and order dated 28.12.2000 passed by District Consumer Forum, Raibareilly in Complaint Case No.14/1998.

(2.) The brief facts of the case as stated before the Forum are as follows : the complainant Sri Sanjeev Kumar Mathur in order to set up a Mini Dal Mill obtained a loan of Rs.60,000/- from the Bank under the scheme entitled as Prime Minister's Rojgar Yojana. A component of this loan amounting to Rs.35,000/- was meant for purchase of machinery and the remaining part of the loan was to be utilized for raw material. During the course of formalities which had been completed in respect of loan by the complainant, the agent of the opposite parties met the complainant and promised to supply the relevant machinery of standard specifications for the project which was to be set up for self employment. The Pulse Mill Machinery which was to be supplied was to be of capacity to process the pulse of one quintal per hour. The Mini Grain Mill was to be of the capacity which could grind the grain of 25 kgs. in one hour. The guarantee of the machine to be supplied was to last for one year. Believing on the version of the agent of the opposite parties, an order was placed by the complainant with M/s. Fine Fabrication Work, opposite party for supply of Pulse Mill Machinery with the capacity to process the pulse of one quintal per hour Grain Cleaner Cum Grader, Mini Grain Mill complete workable on single Phase of 1 H. P. Motor was also ordered to be supplied. The total cost of these machineries amounted to Rs.25,000/-. Accordingly the machinery goods were supplied by the opposite parties on 9.8.1997 in a wooden package through the transport. The packing charges were also paid by the complainant amounting to Rs.2,000/-. The transportation charges of Rs.3,815/- were also paid by the complainant. The documents were retired through the Bank and the cost of the machine was paid to the opposite party accordingly. The complainant in order to instal the machines had spent an amount of Rs.10,000/- in laying the foundation for the machineries. An amount of Rs.8,000/- was also spent on the raw-material by the complainant. On opening the wooden case in which the machineries were kept, the complainant found that the machines supplied were not of standard specifications as laid down in the booklet. The roller of the Dal Mill was found to be completely jammed. The stone of the grinding mill was also found to be static and was unable to move. Duplicate bearings have been used in the machinery. The Dal Mill did not have the capacity to process the Dal of 1 quintal in one hour and was thus found to be below capacity. Similarly the grain mill was also found to be insufficient for grinding 25 kgs. of grains. The complainant then sent a registered letter to the opposite parties indicating the defects in the machines. Inspite of assurances given by them, the machines were neither rectified nor replaced. The opposite parties, therefore, committed deficiency in service by indulging into unfair trade practice which has resulted into financial loss to the complainant. The complainant, therefore, lodged a claim before the District Consumer Forum seeking a direction to be given to the opposite parties to replace the machineries and an amount of Rs.30,000/- spent on the building of foundation and raw-material etc. was also claimed. The complainant has suffered a financial loss of Rs.10,000/- because of non-utilization of the loan and this amount was also claimed. An amount of Rs.50,000/- was also claimed for physical and mental torture and loss of social status.

(3.) The opposite party No.1 M/s. Fine Fabrication Works filed a written statement before the District Consumer Forum and denied most of the allegations contained in the complaint. It was contended on behalf of the opposite parties that the order for the machinery was placed by the complainant and the machinery was of standard specification. There was no agreement to the effect that the replacement or removal of the defects was to be made by the opposite parties for indefinite period. The opposite parties 1 and 2 run the factory which is of repute in Bhopal.