JAN SEWA ASHRAM Vs. TIL LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The machines have assumed significant place in this modern age. One machine can do the work of about 100 ordinary men, in just a few seconds. A machine is fast, accurate and obeys the commands of man. A machine is beneficial and a boon, when it is functional and sans defects but it is detrimental, harmful and ruinous a bane when it becomes defective and non-functional.

(2.) Now, we turn to the facts of the case in hand. This is one of the oldest cases filed in this Commission on 21.08.2000. Jan Seva Ashram, the complainant purchased a Backhoe Loader-cum-Excavator , machine to be used for a project on waste management and making compost out of garbage, in District Solan, Himachal Pradesh, from TIL Ltd., OP1. Copy of letter of offer dated 05.12.1998, along with the terms and conditions, including the warranty offered was placed on record as Annexure C-1 (colly). The machine was purchased for a sum of Rs.14,00,000/- as per the purchase order dated 23.12.1998, copy of which was placed on record as Annexure C-2. This is the first machine which is not the machine in dispute. The said machine was commissioned by Service Engineer of OP1 on 21.01.1999, vide Commissioning Report marked as Annexure C-3. The newly purchased backhoe loader was unauthorisedly operated by a worker who accidently slipped the machine into a deep ditch. The said worker died in the accident and the machine was damaged beyond repairs. The complainant discovered that the charges for an overhaul of the damaged machine would almost equal the cost of a new machine. Therefore, the complainant decided to purchase a new backhoe loader machine from OP1, on the same terms and conditions.

(3.) Accordingly, OP1 sold a new backhoe loader machine to the complainant on the previous terms and conditions. This is the second machine, which is the machine in dispute. Further, OP1 agreed to take back the previous damaged machine at salvage value and adjusted this value against the price of the new machine.