AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
2 paragraphs · 201 wordsPETITIONER was opposite party before the District Forum on a complaint filed by the respondent. District Forum held that plant and machinery supplied by the petitioner to the respondent-complainant were defective and did not render proper service from the very beginning. After appreciation of the evidence District Forum directed refund of the amount paid by the complainant for purchase of the machinery with interest @ 18% per annum w.e.f. 1.11.1992. It was further directed that as soon as the amount is paid to the complainant it will return plant and machinery supplied by the petitioner. Further sum of Rs. 50,000/- awarded as damages and Rs. 5,000/- as costs.
PETITIONER filed appeal against the order of the District Forum before the State Commission. Appeal was partly allowed. Order of the District Forum was modified to the extent that interest awarded @ 18% per annum was reduced to 15% per annum. It was further directed that interest shall be calculated from the respective dates of payment. We do not find it is a fit case for us to exercise our jurisdiction under Clause (b) of Section 21 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. This revision petition is dismissed. Revision Petition dismissed.