KUTHUS, PROPRIETOR Vs. R. ANANDAN
TAMIL NADU STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
Click here to view full judgement.
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
(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.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.