AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
THESE two appeals arise out of order of the District Forum dated 3.3.1997 which was passed in Complaint Case No. 310/96 filed by Akash Deep Bharadwaj, against the appellant.
APPEAL No. 855/97 has been filed by manufacturer M/s. H.C.L. Limited whereas APPEAL No. 556/97 is by M/s. Vikas Office Machines, the agent/dealer. It has been found by the District Forum that there was specific stipulation at the time of sale of machine that it would produce 10,000 copies from out of one bottle of ink (Tonar) but the production was confined only to 3500 copies.
It appears that there was a direction to get the machine repaired within one month which the appellants did not opt for with the result the complainant Akash Deep Bharadwaj moved an application for action under Section 25/27 of COPRA, wherein orders for warrant were issued against the appellants. Challenging these orders a writ petition is said to have been filed by the appellants. Vide application dated 19.5.1998 Counsel for the appellants has filed photocopy of the certified copy of the order of the Hon''ble High Court, Lucknow Bench Lucknow, which indicates that execution of the warrant was stayed nothing has been brought on record about the fate of that writ petition.
THE interim stay order in these two appeals was dependent upon compliance of the order of the District Forum in so far as the repairing of the machine within one month was concerned. Since the appellants did not opt for that alternative obviously the stay order did not operate at all. Mr. Anil Kumar Mishra argued that the allegations in the complaint do not go to indicate that there was any defect in the machine. He further contended that if the tonar was defective it could have been changed and if the copies were still falling short then repairing may have been done. He further contended that District Forum has not appreciated the facts of the case.
NO material whatsoever has been filed in the two appeals which may indicate any attempt on the part of the appellants to repair the machine or to go to the complainant for compliance with the directions not only of the District Forum but also of the Commission at the time of passing of the interim order. The appellants are totally mum on the steps which they were expected to take. In view of what has been discussed above there is no error in the judgment passed by the District Forum, Bulandshahar. Both the appeals fail and are dismissed. However, it will be subject to the order of the Hon. High Court, if any, in the writ petition mentioned above. Parties will bear their own cost. The original judgment shall be kept in the record of Appeal No. 855/1997 and certified copy whereof shall be kept in Appeal No. 556/1997 which shall also be governed by this judgment and order. Appeals dismissed.