ASHOK M MAINKAR Vs. ATL INDIA LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant is challenging the order of dismissal of his complaint passed by the Addl. District Forum, Pune in C. No.67/98.

(2.) The complainant's case in brief before the Forum was that he purchased Ultra Sonography machine from the respondents for an amount of Rs.2,50,885/-. He received the delivery of the machine on 20.5.1997 and the respondent's Service Engineer installed the said machine at Dr. Mainkar's Hospital at Saswad in Pune District. The appellant has stated that Mr. Selva Ganapathy of the respondent had promised to visit his Hospital within 3 weeks after the installation. But attended much later i. e. after 3 months after the installation. The complainant made correspondence with the opponent's Madras H. O. and even sent a registered letter on 17.7.1997 with a stand that the machine had defects and, therefore, it is giving sub-standard quality out put. He had requested the respondents to replace the transducer (sic) on 16.5.1997 during the warranty period. The component transducer of the machine had developed cracks and thereby it was providing signals from the patient's body not upto the mark and despite its replacement twice, the defect continued and the complainant was convinced that the machine supplied to him was of substandard. The complainant filed affidavit on 7.10.1998 and also filed a supplementary affidavit and claimed Rs.2.52 lakhs on account of financial loss suffered by him @ Rs.1,000/- per day during the period from 1.5.1998 to 7.10.1998 since he could not examine the daily patients numbering 5-6. He also requested the District Forum to direct the respondent to replace the defective machine by new one. The opposite party and the present respondent did not appear before the District Forum although the complaint was adjourned 3 times after due service of notice to him. Therefore the Forum proceeded ex-parte against the opposite party.

(3.) The Forum observed that the daily income of Rs.1,000/- by taking up Sonography of 5-6 patients per day amounted to a commercial purpose and relying upon the decision of the Haryana State Commission in Dr. B. S. Singla V/s. Chairman Managing Director, Indchem ATL Ltd., 1993 1 CPJ 522 held that the complainant was not a consumer since he was using the ultra sonography machine for commercial purpose and, therefore, the complaint came to be dismissed.