T M ABU Vs. VIJAYAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the order passed by the District Forum, Kottayam, in O. P. No.273/94. The opposite parties are the appellants.

(2.) Shortly stated, the allegations in the complaint are as follows : the complainant purchased 11,000 bricks from the opposite party through one Rajan for Rs.9,350/- on 25.3.93. But the bricks were substandard and unfit for construction. The matter was informed to the first opposite party. The opposite party promised to replace the bricks or to refund the amount. However, even after repeated requests made by the complainant for one year, the opposite party did not settle the matter.

(3.) The first opposite party filed a version stating that he had no such business and there was no such transaction as alleged in the complaint and he is a Government employee. Probably on account of the contention taken by the first opposite party the complainant's wife was impleaded as second opposite party. But the second opposite party filed a statement stating that she had no such trans ion. The District Forum took the view that it is the first opposite party who was doing the business in the name of his wife and in that view passed an order directing the first opposite party to refund Rs.9,350/-. There was also an order directing to return the bricks. Cost of Rs.250/- was also ordered.