IN THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
RAIPUR (C.G.)
Complaint No. of 2020
Laxmi Enterprises, represented
by Propreitor Mrs. Latika Tiwari,
Office at Plot no 261/C,
Urla industrial area,
opposite S. S Flexi Raipur, Chhattisgarh _________ Complainant
Versus
M/s Laxmi Scientific Works,
Represented by Partner Mr Sandip Verma,
OFFICE AT: 304, Narmada Vihar,
Station Road,
Raipur-Chhattisgarh – 492001 __________ Opposite Party No. 1
Sanjay Kumar Bharya
Business Agent of Op. No 1/Assistant Professor,
Indira Gandhi Krishi Vishwavidyalaya,
Krishak Nagar, Raipur, Chhattisgarh 492012 Opposite Party No. 2
COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 35 OF THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, 2019
1. That, the name and address of the complainant and opposite parties are as stated in the
cause title. The complainant is a consumer represented by proprietor lady, who is the sole
earning member of her family and bought Autoclave Machines from the Op1 no1 for the
purpose of earning her livelihood, through self-employment for her business of
Mushroom Seeds, therein she approached approached Op. No. 1 on a reference and
assurance of consultant / Broker, Op no. 2.
2. It is pertinent to mention herein that opposite party no.2 played a role of business
development agency of Op. No 1 and assured the complainant that he takes personal
warranty of the product delivered by Op. No 1 and informed the complainant that he has
his own set up of mushroom business therein he has procured various machines from Op
no1. Complainant has come to learn that Op. No 2 takes commission from Op. No 1 to
send clients to him.
3. That, on 12/8/2020, Complainant paid Rupees 1,70,489 against two Autoclave machines
but she was shocked find manual autoclave machine at the time of delivery as the Op.
No 1 and 2 induced complainant to believe that the machine would be automatic and
would function in accordance with ISO and Sterilization Guidelines of International
Committee of the Red Cross. Copy of Bill/Invoice is attached here as Annexure C-1.
4. It important to mention herein that Complainant enquired about the Autoclave machines
from the various vendors and agreed to purchase the machines including Autoclave
machines from Op. No 1 based on representation of Op. No 1 and 2, that the machines
will be best in class and Autoclave machine going to be delivered would be fully
automatic, subsequently complainant gave consideration to Op no 1 and 2 relying on
assurance of delivering fully automatic 178Litre Autoclave machines, though the price
offered by Op. No 1 was far higher than other vendors in market.
5. That, subsequently, when complainant requested op. No 1 and 2 to provide automatic
autoclave machine as told by them, she was informed through representative of Op. No1
to manage with manual machine for time being and they would provide her automatic
machine soon.
6. That, when the complainant installed the machine in her premises, her staffs got high
wave electric shock. Op. No 1 and 2 were known about the inherent manufacturing defect
in the machine supplied by them but they intentionally endangered the life and personal
safety of Complainant for illicit money and hatched criminal conspiracy with common
intentions . The inherent manufacturing defects in Autoclave machine, which
complainant came to learn from the enquiry from experts are provided as follow:-
1. Sparking from the Panel in both the Autoclave machines
2. High wave electric shock from panel which is a inherent manufacturing
defect.
3. Electric panel and safety valve/pressure releasing valve should be on the
opposite side as there is risk of water entering in the electric panel but in
the machines provided by you both electric panel and pressure releasing
valve are adjacent, which is not only a defect but can endanger the
personal safety of people operating the machine, which is already known
to you but due to your greed you are selling this machine to make illegal
profit
4. Safety valve /Pressure releasing valve and electric circuit are mounted on
the same panel and due to pressure releasing valve, a current of
approximately 6000 Watts flow on the operating panel, which is sufficient
to cause death and can take many life’s as the circuit is connected to all
the machines in any Factory.
7. That, on 21/10/2019, Op no1 and 2 gave unconditional consent to refund the amount of
Rupees 1,70,489 received from complainant and received back both the autoclave
machines and till this date they have not returned the amount to complainant by making
one pretext over the other. Copy of dispatch receipt and Pics of the Representatives no 1
while taking back the Autoclave machines is annexed herewith as annexure C2 and C3.
8. That, the Op. No 1nad 2 have falsely represented that the machine provided by them
would be fully automatic and further assured the Complainant that the Autoclave
machines would function in accordance with ISO and Sterilization Guidelines of
International Committee of the Red Cross, therein they received almost double
consideration from the complainant but to the contrary they provided manual defective
autoclave machines by misleading complainant, which had endangered the life of
complainant and her staff . Op no.1 has received back Autoclave machine from the
premises of the Complainant on assurance of refunding the entire consideration of
Rupees 1,70,489 / One Lac Seventy thousand four hundred eighty Nine Rupees but they
are deliberately not refunding the amount to the complainant. Complainant has already
served the legal notice dated 5/11/2020 to the Op no.1 through her Advocate Virat
Verma. The act of Op.1 and Op. No2 amounts unfair trade practice as defined in section
2(47) of consumer protection act 2019. Copy of Legal notice and Postal receipt are
annexed herewith as Annexure C4 and C5.
9. That, Complainant has recently received reply from the Op. No1, therein they have
mentioned that they have not received back the machines from the complainant, whereas
complainant has sufficient evidence of returning the Autoclave machines to the godown
of Op.No1.
10. That, the opposite parties have its work office & business in Raipur (C.G.) and the
complainant as well as the opposite parties all are the permanent resident of Raipur
(C.G). The amount claimed under this petition is below 1 crore hence this Hon’ble forum
has both peculiarly and territorial jurisdiction to hear and decide this matter.
11. That, the applicant is hereby appending proper fee in the form of postal order as per the
provisions of the Consumer protection Act.
12. That, the complainant being aggrieved by the said act of the opposite parties begs to
submit this complaint on the above mentioned grounds and substantial question of law.
13. That, the complainant files necessary documents to substantiate his case before the
Hon’ble forum along with his memo of complaint and keeps the rights to file further
documents as and when found necessary.
PRAYER
The complainant, therefore most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble forum may allow the
following reliefs: --
1. To direct the opposite party 1 & 2 to refund the amount of Rupees 1,70,489 / One Lac
Seventy thousand four hundred eighty Nine Rupees to the Complainant.
2. To direct the opposite parties for the payment of interest @ 18% per annum till the
settlement of the claim.
3. To direct the Opposite party no.1 to withdraw the manual Autoclave machine from the
market as it is dangerous, hazardous or unsafe for human life and may cause serious loss
to many people in the society.
4. To direct the employer of Opposite party no.2/ Indira Gandhi Krishi
Vishwavidyalaya Raipur to terminate the services of O.p no 2 and initiate departmental
enquiry against him for misleading complainant and receiving commission from the O.p
no 1 and complainant in contravention to service rules.
5. Compensation to the tune of Rs. 5,00,000/- for mental agony and irresponsible attitude
and high handedness of the non-applicant may also be allowed in the interest of justice.
6. Expenses in connection with the litigation amounting to Rs. 50,000/- may also be
allowed.
7. Any other relief which the Hon’ble forum may feel deem fit and proper under the
circumstances.
Place: - Raipur (C.G.)
Date: -- Complainant
Counsel for Complainant
IN THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
RAIPUR (C.G.)
Complaint No. of 2020
Laxmi Enterprises Complainant
Versus
M/s Laxmi Scientific Works & Other Opposite Partie
AFFIDAVIT
I Latika Tiwari, Propreitor Laxmi Enterprises, Office at Plot no 261/C, Urla industrial area
opposite S. S Flexi Raipur, Chhattisgarh do solemnly affirm on oath as under: --
1. That, the complainant is a consumer represented by me, am the sole earning member
ofmy family and bought Autoclave Machines from the Op1 no1 for the purpose of
earning my livelihood, through self-employment for my business of Mushroom Seeds,
therein I approached approached Op. No. 1 on a reference and assurance of consultant /
Broker, Op no. 2.
2. It is pertinent to mention herein that opposite party no.2 played a role of business
development agency of Op. No 1 and assured me that he takes personal warranty of the
product delivered by Op. No 1 and informed me that he has his own set up of mushroom
business therein he has procured various machines from Op no1. I have come to learn
that Op. No 2 takes commission from Op. No 1 to send clients to him.
3. That, on 12/8/2020, I have paid Rupees 1,70,489 against two Autoclave machines but I
was shocked to find manual autoclave machine at the time of delivery as the Op. No 1
and 2 induced me to believe that the machine would be automatic and would function in
accordance with ISO and Sterilization Guidelines of International Committee of the
Red Cross. Copy of Bill/Invoice is attached here as Annexure C-1.
4. It important to mention herein that I enquired about the Autoclave machines from the
various vendors and agreed to purchase the machines including Autoclave machines from
Op. No 1 based on representation of Op. No 1 and 2, that the machines will be best in
class and Autoclave machine going to be delivered would be fully automatic,
subsequently I gave consideration to Op no 1 and 2 relying on assurance of delivering
fully automatic 178Litre Autoclave machines, though the price offered by Op. No 1 was
far higher than other vendors in market.
5. That, subsequently, when I requested op. No 1 and 2 to provide automatic autoclave
machine as told by them, I was informed through representative of Op. No1 to manage
with manual machine for time being and they would provide her automatic machine soon.
6. That, when I installed the machine in my premises, my staffs got high wave electric
shock. Op. No 1 and 2 were known about the inherent manufacturing defect in the
machine supplied by them but they intentionally endangered the life and personal safety
of Complainant for illicit money and hatched criminal conspiracy with common
intentions . The inherent manufacturing defects in Autoclave machine, which
complainant came to learn from the enquiry from experts are provided as follow:-
i. Sparking from the Panel in both the Autoclave machines
ii. High wave electric shock from panel which is a inherent manufacturing
defect.
iii. Electric panel and safety valve/pressure releasing valve should be on the
opposite side as there is risk of water entering in the electric panel but in
the machines provided by you both electric panel and pressure releasing
valve are adjacent, which is not only a defect but can endanger the
personal safety of people operating the machine, which is already known
to you but due to your greed you are selling this machine to make illegal
profit
iv. Safety valve /Pressure releasing valve and electric circuit are mounted on
the same panel and due to pressure releasing valve, a current of
approximately 6000 Watts flow on the operating panel, which is sufficient
to cause death and can take many life’s as the circuit is connected to all
the machines in any Factory.
7. That, on 21/10/2019, Op no1 and 2 gave unconditional consent to refund the amount of
Rupees 1,70,489 received from me and received back both the autoclave machines and
till this date they have not returned the amount to me by making one pretext over the
other. Copy of dispatch receipt and Pics of the Representatives no 1 while taking back the
Autoclave machines is annexed herewith as annexure C2 and C3.
8. That, the Op. No 1nad 2 have falsely represented that the machine provided by them
would be fully automatic and further assured me that the Autoclave machines would
function in accordance with ISO and Sterilization Guidelines of International Committee
of the Red Cross, therein they received almost double consideration from the complainant
but to the contrary they provided manual defective autoclave machines by misleading me,
which had endangered the my and staffs life . Op no.1 has received back Autoclave
machine from the premises on assurance of refunding the entire consideration of Rupees
1,70,489 / One Lac Seventy thousand four hundred eighty Nine Rupees but they are
deliberately not refunding the amount to me. I have already served the legal notice dated
5/11/2020 to the Op no.1 through my Advocate Virat Verma. The act of Op.1 and Op.
No2 amounts unfair trade practice as defined in section 2(47) of consumer protection act
2019. Copy of Legal notice and Postal receipt are annexed herewith as Annexure C4 and
C5.
9. That, I have recently received reply from the Op. No1, therein they have mentioned that
they have not received back the machines from me, whereas I have sufficient evidence of
returning the Autoclave machines to the godown of Op.No1.
Deponent
VERIFICATION
I the above named deponent verify that the contents of this affidavit from Para 01 to 09 are
true and correct and verified on dated ____ day of _______, 2020 at Raipur (C.G.)
Place: - Raipur
Date: - Deponent
