JANGBIR SINGH, ADVOCATE vs PARKASH LAL And CO.

THE unsuccessful complainant appeals against the order of the District Forum, Gurgaon non-suiting him on the ground of want of any credible documentary evidence in support of this case.

THE facts and merits deserve notice with utmost brevity. In the some-what sketchy complaint it was alleged that the appellant had purchased a two-in-one electronic article from M/s. Parkash Lal & Company for Rs. 1550/- in the preceding year. It is significant that even the date of the purchase was not specified. THE allegation was that the said article was defective from very beginning and it was returned by him to the shop-keeper for repair who charged Rs. 80/- therefor, even though there was a guarantee of one year. THE further allegation was that the said article was neither repaired nor the price thereof was returned and on that fragile premise the complaint was preferred. In defending the complaint resolutely the dealer in his reply made a categoric denial of having sold any two-in-one to the complainant. Equally it was categorically averred that no guarantee for one year was given and further that no amount was charged for any repair etc.

The District Forum noticed that even the date of the purchase was not specified nor the bill therefor was either attached or produced. Equally the supposed guarantee card for one year was not forth-coming nor any bill to show the payment of Rs. 80/- . Holding that without such documentary evidence it was difficult to accept the case of the appellant. The same was dismissed.

MR. Sudhir Aggarwal with vain persistence had contended that the appellant had put in his own affidavit and the District Forum should have perforce accepted the same and decree the matter in his favour. We are afraid that there is not the least modicum of merit in the aforesaid submission. In a order of affirmance it is not only unnecessary but indeed wasteful to tread the same ground again because we are entirely in agreement with the rationale and the conclusion of the District Forum. Even when pin-pointed the learned Counsel for the complainant could not even suggest the date of the purchase nor was any meaningful explanation given for the non-production of the bill or cash memo therefor and further of the alleged guarantee of one year which, was the sheet-anchor of the appellant''s case. What is further surprising is the fact that even the allegation of the payment of Rs. 80/- as repair charges etc. was not backed by a title of documentary evidence either. In such a situation the District Forum was eminently right in its view of not determining the same. Consequently we dismiss the appeal without any order as to costs. Appeal dismissed.