Mr Justice P.K. Shamsuddin, President— This appeal is directed against the order passed by the District Forum, Ernakulam, in O.P. No. 991/95. The complainant is the appellant.

2. The material allegations in the complaint are as follows :

The complainant is an unemployed postgraduate who availed of a loan of Rs. 75,000/- from Federal Bank and purchased opposite party's Photostat machine paying Rs. 1,10,000/- on 15.12.93. It was installed on 16.12.93 and trial run was made on 17.12.93. The opposite party's men assured that toner costing Rs. 650/- would be enough for 4000 copies and one drum would serve for one lakh copies. The viability of the scheme was based on that. The assurance given by the Service Engineer before purchase vanished and the machine started complaints immediately after trial run on 17.12.1993. The complaints were jamming of papers, blackened copies, black strips and high rate of toner consumption. It has spoiled 17,000 copies costing Rs. 15,000/-. Instead of 5,000 copies per bottle of toner, it gives only 2,700 copies and now it has come down to 1,500/1,600 copies. The drum had to be replaced on 28.3.94 costing Rs. 8,000/-. It was further replaced on 21.6.94.