ELECTROLUX MAHARAJA INTER-NATIONAL LTD. vs TEG BAHADUR SINGH

THE present appeal is by M/s. Electrolux Maharaja International Limited, the manufacturer of refrigerator, challenging order of District Forum, Patiala dated January 13, 1998 whereby direction was given to the opposite parties to refund the entire price of the refrigerator alongwith Rs. 2,000/- costs to the complainant, Tej Bahadur Singh.

THE complainant Dr. Tej Bahadur Singh purchased refrigerator on February 28, 1997 on payment of Rs. 10,600/- from M/s. Orient Traders, Patiala. Immediately after the purchase at the time of installation, it was found that the body of the refrigerator had dents and there was gap between the door and the body. Complaint was lodged with the dealer, and the door was replaced. However, dents were not removed. Subsequently, the compressor stopped functioning. Again complaint was lodged and the Engineer of the dealer showed his inability to replace the compressor as the same could be done only by the manufacturer. THE complaint was filed before the District Forum on August 7, 1997. On notice of the complaint, Deep Gagan, Branch Manager of the manufacturer put in appearance on September 8, 1997 and the case was adjourned on request to September 20, 1997. THEreafter nobody appeared on behalf of the opposite parties. Still one adjournment was allowed for filing reply i.e., October 6, 1997. Ultimately on evidence produced by the complainant ex parte, the order was passed. In the grounds of appeal, in Ground No. 7(v) it is admitted that Company''s Manager had put in appearance before the District Forum and he was made to believe that the matter would be amicably settled. It was thereafter that the impugned order was received by the appellant. Thus it is not a case where the appellant was not served and was proceeded ex parte that any more opportunity could be allowed to the appellant to submit its version or be allowed to take up the pleas on merits. If the opposite party had failed to produce its version after notice, no pleas on merits can be permitted to be raised for the first time in appeal. At the time of admission of the appeal on February 24, 1998 execution of the order of the District Forum was stayed subject to replacement of the compressor within a period of 15 days and payment of costs of Rs. 2,000/- as ordered by the District Forum. Counsel for the respondent states that costs were paid but compressor was not replaced. This would show that even at this stage, the appellant is not willing to even replace the compressor and for all this period the refrigerator is lying at the premises of the opposite party unused and complainant is deprived of the money spent on purchasing such type of refrigerator which immediately after the purchase started giving constant trouble and stopped functioning. In this view of the matter the only course open is to affirm the order of the District Forum while dismissing the appeal with costs of Rs. 500/-. So ordered. Appeal dismissed.