GULNAZ SHARIFKHAN MALIK Vs. PRAKASHVIR PARIKH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) None is present on behalf of the respondent despite the fact that notice dated 17.4.2006 sent by Regd. Post on 18.4.2006 has not been received back unserved. Consequently, it shall be deemed to have been served on the respondent.

(2.) The appellant aggrieved by the order passed by the learned State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Kerala allowing the complaint of the respondent by awarding compensation of Rs. 2,33,987 with interest @ 12% p.a. from the date of the complaint with cost of Rs. 1,500.

(3.) The complainant/respondent entered into an agreement to supply, erect and instal the entire machinery in order to start a quarry business with the opposite party/appellant whereunder the appellant agreed to supply the entire machinery, a sum of Rs. 50,000 was paid on 2.12.1992 and another Rs. 50,000 was paid on 23.5.1992 at Vatanappally towards advance. The entire system was to be installed at the native place of the complainant. Subsequently, the complainant purchased a plot at Eruthempathy on 10.12.1993 and the appellant reached at the Eruthempathy and offered to supply and erect the Jaw Crusher along with its complete accessories and connected equipment and gave quotations accordingly for supply and erection of the machinery for a sum of Rs. 4,05,900 including 10% CST. The machinery was to be supplied along with installation within 45 days. A sum of Rs. 10,000 was paid on 10.12.1993 making of total advance to Rs. 1,10,000. Accordingly, the appellant/opposite party was supposed to provide the following machinery and its accessories as per the order placed: