Back
2004 Supreme(Kar) 162
Karnataka High Court
CITY MUNICIPAL COUNCIL, MANGALORE - Appellant
Versus
S.A.Lateef and Co - Respondent
Decided On : 02-27-04
R.F.A. : 227 of 1999
Chandra Mohan, RAVI
The main legal point established in the judgment is the applicability of the Consumer Protection Act and the limitation under Section 14 of the Limitation Act in a dispute over defective goods.
Headnote:
Limitation Act - Consumer Protection - The court held that the dispute was not governed by the Consumer Protection Act and allowed the plaintiff to approach the Civil Court. The defendant contended that the pump sets supplied were defective and that the suit was barred by time under Section 14 of the Limitation Act.
Fact of the Case:
The plaintiff filed a suit for recovery of money for pump sets supplied, which the defendant contended were defective. The defendant also argued that the suit was barred by time.
Finding of the Court:
The trial court decreed the suit claim with interest, and the appeal was allowed in part, with the defendant being directed to pay the balance amount.
Issues: Dispute over defective pump sets, applicability of the Consumer Protection Act, and the limitation under Section 14 of the Limitation Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The court found that the dispute was not governed by the Consumer Protection Act and allowed the plaintiff to approach the Civil Court. The court also considered the defendant's contention regarding the defective pump sets and the applicability of Section 14 of the Limitation Act.
Final Decision: The appeal was allowed in part, and the defendant was directed to pay the balance amount with interest.
( 1 ) THE appeal is filed against the order of the Civil Judge (Sr. Dn. J, Kolar in O. S. No. 6/98.
( 2 ) THE appellant is the defendant. The respondent-plaintiff filed a suit for recovery of money in a sum of Rs. 2,10,275-50 with costs and interest. The defendant had invited tenders towards supply of pump sets. The plaintiffs tender is accepted. Accordingly, the plaintiff supplied' the pump sets on 22-3-1993. A sum of Rs. 3,13,000-00 was paid towards the part of the value of the pump sets and the balance of Rs. 2,10,275-50 remained unpaid. The petitioner got issued legal notice. Later on filed a complaint before the District consumer forum, Kolar in complaint No. KOF/ comp/6-95. The complaint was allowed and defendant was directed to pay the balance amount. In the appeal, the State Commission by its order dated 16-1-1996 held that the subject matter of dispute is not governed by the Consumer Protection Act and gave liberty to the plaintiff to approach Civil Court. Accordingly suit is filed.
( 3 ) THE defendant contends that the pump sets supplied are defective. As per the agreement mico sets were to be supplied, whereas the plaintiff supplied Rolex company sets and they are substandard. It is also stated that the plaintiff undertook to replace with the pump sets of MICO Company and failed to do so; therefore disputes the liability to pay the suit claim. It is contended that Section 14 of the Limitation Act will not apply and the suit is barred by time. Hence, pray for dismissal of the suit. The trial court decreed the suit claim with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from annum from the date of transaction till payment. Accordingly, appeal is allowed in part. Order accordingly.
--- *** ---
.
