AMBIKA PIPE STORE Vs. HAKIKAT SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present Revision Petition (RP) has been filed by the Petitioner against Respondent as detailed above, under sec. 21 of Consumer Protection Act 1986, against the order dtd. 20/5/2019 of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Punjab (hereinafter referred to as the 'State Commission'), in First Appeal (FA) No.270 of 2018 in which order dtd. 26/2/2018 of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Sri Muktsar Sahib (Punjab) (hereinafter referred to as District Forum) in Consumer Complaint (CC) no. 83 of 2012 was challenged, inter alia praying for setting aside the order passed by the State Commission and dismissing the complaint.

(2.) While the Revision Petitioner (hereinafter also referred to as OP-1) was Respondent-1 and the Respondent (hereinafter also referred to as Complainant) was Appellant in the said FA 270 of 2018 before the State Commission the Revision Petitioner was OP-1 and Respondent was Complainant before the District Forum in the CC No. 83 of 2012. Notice was issued to the Respondent on 2/1/2020. For the sake of convenience, parties will be referred to as they were arrayed before the District Forum.

(3.) Brief facts of the case, as emerged from the RP, Order of the State Commission, Order of the District Forum and other case records are that the complainant, is an agriculturist by profession and is co-owner and in profession of agricultural land at Village Phullo. The complainant, in order to irrigate his land, purchased 200 PVC pipes (as per their first complaint dtd. 30/3/2012) from the Petitioner for a price of Rs.94,810.00. In his amended complaint, the complainant stated that he purchased 525 PVC pipes from Petitioner but to avoid payment of income Tax etc., Petitioner issued bill No. 746 dtd. 30/5/2011 only for Rs.1,00,025.00 by mentioning purchase of only 200 pipes and that the actual payment made was of Rs.3,20,250.00. These pipes have been laid down underground by complainant with the help of labour by spending expenses from his pocket for carrying water from tubewell bore to different parts of his land. In June 2011 the complainant laid down those pipes at the depth of 3 1/2 feet. After three days of using the pipes, the pipes started cracking and leaking at many places. Hence, the complainant filed complaint before the District Forum. Vide Order dtd. 26/2/2018 in the CC no. 83 of 2012 the District Forum dismissed the complaint.