GOLDEN LIQUID SOLUTIONS Vs. V.S.PRABHAKARA GUPTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved by the order in C.C.No.383/2007 on the file of District Forum-II, Hyderabad, the opposite party preferred this appeal.

(2.) The brief facts as set out in the complaint are that the complainant purchased one Water Softener and RO Water Purifier on 20.6.2005 from the opposite party. The capacity of the softener is based on the horse power of complainants borewell motor which is 1.5 H.P. The opposite party suggested the complainant to go for a 6000 LPH softener to take care of the load. The opposite party assured the complainant that final installation will be done after the complainant moves into his house. Accordingly the order was placed and the payments effected. The supply of the softener was done in June,2005 but the opposite party did not complete the installation till mid January,2006 and on the very first run of the motor and softener, the PVC pipes fixed to the softener broke into pieces and the opposite party took about two to three months to replace the PVC pipes and fittings and hence the pipes were continuously leaking. Vexed with the attitude of the opposite party in not rectifying the defect, the complainant on 3.4.2006 requested the opposite party to take back the softener but the opposite party did not respond and the complainant got issued a legal notice on 12.11.2006 calling upon to refund the money and take back the softener for which also there was no response from the opposite party. Hence the complaint seeking direction to the opposite party to take back the said non functional equipment and pay the amount with interest at 24% p.a. , to pay compensation of Rs.1 lakh and to award costs.

(3.) The opposite party filed counter affidavit stating that on 20.6.2005 the complainant purchased one 6000 LPH Water Softener for Rs.27,000/- and also purchased one RO Water Purifier with one year warranty from the date of installation. The scope of supply of water softener pertains to providing FRP Tank, Resin, Multi Port Valve, Brine Tank and its connector to the Multi port valve and only as per the instructions of the complainant the said water softener was installed to the complainants house on 21.6.2005. The PVC pipes fixed to the softener provided by the complainant is no way concerned with that of the opposite party. The water purifier was tested in the presence of the complainant and it has been functioning properly and the opposite party did not receive any complaint during the warranty period and after one year five months the complainant got issued a letter dt.12.11.2006 with baseless allegations. The opposite party contends that they have visited the house of the complainant but did not find any defects but found that there were sand particles coming in the water from the borewell and therefore the complainant was advised to install the sediment filtration which removes physical impurities like sand, mud and dust particles etc. otherwise there is possibility to block the valves of the said water softener. The opposite party submits that the water softener is free of defects and if there is any defects in PVC pipes, the opposite party is not responsible and the water softener is suitable for 1.5 H.P. motor if the bore water is free from all physical impurities like sand, mud, dust particles etc. and there is no deficiency in service on their behalf and they are not liable to pay any amount.