MODERN RICE MILL MACHINERY COMPANY Vs. MAHESWAR SAHU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal by the supplier of a Rice Huller Unit to the complainant which was purchased by him on a loan from the National Small Industries Corporation. On 21.11.1994 the same was installed in the rented premises of the complainant but without a polisher. On demand by the complainant polisher was installed on 8.5.1995. Complainant claims that in good faith on 9.5.1995 he no doubt gave a certificate regarding the due performance of the polisher but only after a month of this installation the metal polisher went out of order and the Mill remained defunct. The complainant requested the appellant to replace the polisher. By their letter dated 1.3.1997 the appellant-Company intimated that the polisher should be brought to them. Ultimately replacement was done on 19.7.1997. The complainant claims that he sustained loss of about Rs.3,00,000/- for such deficiency of service.

(2.) Several grounds in defence by the Supplier was taken such as absence of jurisdiction of the Forum, the complainant being not a consumer, the rice huller was installed for commercial purpose and lastly the certificate dated 9.5.1995 given by the complainant about the satisfactory performance of the polisher, indicated that there was no defect in the polisher.

(3.) The District Forum held and that too rightly that the Forum has jurisdiction because the rice huller was installed in the village of the complainant that comes within the jurisdiction of the Kendrapara District Forum. It also rightly held that the complainant is a consumer having entered into a sales transaction and supplied the machineries. So far as the certificate given by the complainant is concerned, it cannot be said that having signed such letter he could not complain about the defect in the machine. Infact the certificate was given on 9.5.1995, the next day after the installation. Therefore, this is no way helpful for the appellant to take a defence to counter the liability alleged.