Before the Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Uttar Pradesh
(Appellate Jurisdiction)
Appeal No……………….. of 2001
M/s. Reliable Industries Ltd. 37, Bihari Complex, Ahmedabad
ADVERTISEMENTS:
Appellants
Versus
Sri ……………… Respondent
Appeal against order passed by the District forum under Section 14 of
ADVERTISEMENTS:
the Consumer Protection Act, 1986
It is respectfully submitted as under :
1. That the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum District Allahabad has directed the appellant for payment of a sum of Rs. 17,600.00 in complaint No. 1196 of 1999 decided on 13.3.2000.
2. That the respondent had purchased a Mixer-cum-grinder manufactured by the appellants on payment of price prevailing on the date of purchase.
ADVERTISEMENTS:
3. That the respondent was handed over warranty card in respect of the said Mixer-cum-grinder (hereinafter described as M.G.) and also an instruction booklet. The working of the M.G. was properly explained to the respondent.
4. That the respondent reported about the malfunctioning of the M.G. to the selling dealer of the appellants who made several enquiries from the respondent about the utilization of the M.G. by the respondent and it was learnt that the respondent did not handle it with due care and did not follow the instructions given in the instruction book which resulted in malfunctioning of the M.G.
5. That since the fault was a direct result of mishandling of the M.G., the appellants were not responsible in any way to compensate the respondent.
6. That the Hon’ble District Forum has not recorded a finding that the malfunctioning of the M.G. was on account of any manufacturing defect. Before awarding the compensation and costs to the respondent the Hon’ble District Forum should have recorded a finding of fact whether the fault pointed out by the respondent in the functioning of the M.G. was on account of any manufacturing defect and that whether the appellant manufacturer was liable to compensate the purchaser respondent for the said faults.
7. That the Hon’ble District Forum has also not considered the objection of the appellants that the M.G. was not properly handled by the respondent particularly it was used on a low voltage powerline. Moreover the respondent feeded spices into the M.G. in more than recommended quantity whereby the machine of the M.G. was overloaded causing damage to the coupling and some other parts of the M.G.
8. That the Hon’ble District Forum also did not record a finding on the question whether the M.G. was exclusively used by the purchaser respondent or it was given for use by some other persons. The conditions of the warranty are that the M.G. should be used exclusively by the purchaser and should not be allowed to be used by any person other than purchaser which includes a family member thereof.
9. That in view of the circumstances of the case the Hon’ble District Forum was not at all justified in allowing the compensation and costs to the respondent.
10. That the order of the Hon’ble District Forum is against the facts of the case and the law.
11. That in any view of the matter the order of the Hon’ble District Forum is not sustainable in law.
Prayer
It is therefore respectfully prayed that the appeal be kindly allowed and the order of the District Forum dated 13.3.2000 be set aside and the appellants be declared not liable to pay any compensation and costs to the respondent.
Appellant
Verification
I, Raman Sharma s/o K.C. Sharma, General Manager and duly constituted attorney of the appellants do hereby verify that the contents of this memorandum of appeal are true to the best of my knowledge and belief.
Verified today dated 10.4.2000 at Lucknow.
Image Source: blog.scconline.com
Appellants