SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

J.M.MALIK, S.M.KANTIKAR
BENGAL ROWING CLUB – Appellant
Versus
KING FISHER ELEVATOR INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD. – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Partha Sil, Advocate, for the Appellant; None for the Respondents, for the Respondent

ORDER

J.M. Malik, (P.M) - The whole controversy pivots around the question of maintainability of this complaint, i.e., "Whether, the Bengal Rowing Club, a Body corporate incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, having its registered office at Kolkata, the Complainant, is a "consumer", under Section 2(1)(d) (i) and (ii) with the explanation appended to it, of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

2. The complainant approached several lift manufacturers. The offer dated 08.06.2010 of King Fisher Elevator Industries Pvt. Ltd., the OP1, was found to be most competitive. The complainant placed an order to OP1 to install one Hydraulic 8-passenger lift and paid price of Rs. 4.7 lakhs and incidental costs in the sum of Rs. 0.75 lakhs towards M.S. structure and interior design necessary to install the lift. It is alleged that OP1 did not satisfactorily install the lift. The same had several defects. Correspondence went on between the parties but the defects could not be removed. OP1, thereafter, introduced Frankson Elevator & Escalator Industries, OP2 to remove the defects. However, both tried to remove the defects, but they failed to do so. The complainant, on its own engaged Kone Elevator

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top