LAWS(NCD)-1999-9-39

CONTROL ZEE P LTD Vs. P ABDUL SAMAD

Decided On September 01, 1999
CONTROL ZEE P LTD Appellant
V/S
P ABDUL SAMAD Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The opposite parties 1 to 3 in O. P. No.275/94 on the file of the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Kozhikode are the appellants.

(2.) The complainant sought for a direction to opposite parties 1 to 3 to refund Rs.87,800/- through with interest and also for damages of Rs.50,000/-. The allegation was the opposite parties 1 to 3 received Rs.63,800/- for supply of a computer, the first opposite party received Rs.24,500/- for supplying laser printer, and the opposite parties 1 to 3 agreed to supply the same as per the specification in Exbts. A1 and A3 series quotation. The grievance of the complainant was that the computer supplied was not in accordance with the specification as agreed. Consequently the complainant could not functioning the same, therefore, the complainant wanted return of the amount received by the opposite parties. Opposite parties 1 to 3 in their version among other contentions sought to maintain, that the opposite party No.4 placed an order for a computer, a laser printer and a UPS with them, that the opposite party No.1 is only a booking agency of M/s. Sterling Computers Pvt. Ltd. , Madras who are the manufacturers of the computers and UPS, that they forwarded the order to the M/s. Sterling Computers Pvt. Ltd. and that for the alleged defect the said M/s. Sterling Computers Pvt. Ltd. , Madras, being the manufacturer of the computer and UPS is a necessary party to proceeding and the complaint is bad for non-joinder or necessary parties. They also raised other contentions also.

(3.) The 4th opposite party did not file any version. The complaint was once disposed of by the District Forum making a direction to refund the purchase price of the equipment mentioned above, against which the opposite parties 1 and 3 preferred Appeal No.1320/95. My learned predecessor allowed the appeal on condition of payment of costs and also deposit of 1/3 of the amount directed to be returned by the District Forum. This Commission observed that it would be open to the complainant or opposite parties 1 and 3 to move the District Forum for getting the manufacturer impleaded if they are so advised. After remand on opposite parties 1 and 3 complying the condition in the remand order the matter was restored and the District Forum examined the complainant as P. W.1, marked Exbts. A1 to A4 and then made the direction to the first opposite party to pay a sum of Rs.74,500/- to the complainant with interest at 15% and Rs.3,000/- towards costs. The said direction is again challenged by the opposite parties 1 to 3 in this appeal.