M. THANIKACHALAM J. - (1.) The opposite parties are the appellants.
(2.) The respondent in this appeal, had purchased a lathe machine, from the 1st opposite party, which was manufactured by the 2nd opposite party, for a sum of Rs.1,47,000/-. The machine was installed on 16.7.2003, and it failed to function from 23.7.2003, thereby causing problems, which was reported to the 1st opposite party, who came and had taken photographs. The defective parts, inferior in quality, were not replaced, despite repeated demands and legal notice. Due to the defective supply, no production could be done, by the complainant, and thus he was unable to manufacture the orders, and supply to his customers, thereby he was put to, not only monetary loss, but also mental agony. The opposite parties should be held responsible, for deficiency in service, as well as for unfair trade practice. Hence the complainant is entitled to a direction for replacement of the old machine, with new machine, with a compensation of Rs.3 lakhs, for that purpose the complaint came to be filed before the District Forum.
(3.) As recorded by the District Forum, the 2nd opposite party has not received the notice, whereas the 1st opposite party, who appeared through counsel, failed to file written version, resulting both the opposite parties were set exparte.;