The main legal point established in the judgment is the entitlement of the complainant to compensation for non-use of the machinery, day to day loss, deficient services, and wrongful practices by the respondents.

JUDGMENT :

Javed Iqbal, J.

1. The instant appeal is directed against award dated 25.08.2014 (hereinafter for short “the impugned award”) passed by the J&K State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Srinagar, (hereinafter for short “The Commission”) in consumer complaint bearing File No. 29/2009 titled “Mohammad Akbar Bhat Vs. Gautam Engineering Company and Anr.” (hereinafter for short “the complaint”).

Facts:

• The appellant herein filed a complaint under the provisions of the Jammu and Kashmir Consumer Protection Act, 1987 (for short “the Act of 1987”) initially against the respondent 1 herein stating therein that in order to earn his livelihood, he purchased a JCB Hydraulic Excavator of 3-DX Model on 01.10.2008 for an amount of Rs. 22,22,153/- acknowledged by the respondent 1 by a bill/invoice.

• It came to be further pleaded in the complaint by the complainant/appellant herein that when the said JCB was put to work on 10.10.2008, within few hours it developed mechanical snag and became dysfunctional which came to be conveyed to the respondent 1 herein on the very same day telephonically who got it inspected and checked by a mechanic at site, whereafter the respondent 1 herein informed the complainant/appellant herein that the engine of the JCB has developed major defects and needs to be replaced. For inspecting and repairing the JCB on the said day, the respondent 1 herein is stated to have charged the complainant appellant herein an amount of Rs. 27,430/- despite the fact that the JCB was within its warranty period.

• It came to be further stated in the complaint by the complainant/appellant herein that he sent a letter to the respondent 1 herein through fax on 12.10.2008 requesting for replacing the defective JCB immediately as otherwise the complainant appellant herein would suffer a heavy financial loss owing to the reason that the complainant appellant herein has purchased the JCB after availing a huge amount of loan from the J&K Bank branch office Namblabal Pampore against a huge rate of interest and also that the complainant appellant has entertained number of contract works with various contractors which complainant appellant would lose in case the JCB is not replaced.

• It came to be next pleaded in the complaint by the complainant appellant herein that the respondent 1 herein assured the complainant appellant herein that the defective engine of the JCB would be replaced within a few days and that though the engine was repaired, the JCB Excavator again developed problems and again for its temporary repair, respondent 1 herein charged an amount of Rs. 16,931/- from the complainant appellant herein.

• It came to be further averred in the complaint by the complainant appellant herein that the respondent 1 herein thereafter informed him that a new engine has arrived from respondent 2 herein to be fitted in the JCB and as such the defective JCB was taken by the complainant appellant herein to the work place of respondent 1 herein at his own cost and labour however, surprisingly found the so called new engine to be fitted in the JCB as an old one against which the complainant appellant herein objected and demanded that the defective JCB be either replaced with a new one or a new engine be fitted therein or in the alternative he be paid back his money to which the respondent 1 herein did not accede to, resulting into rendering the complainant appellant herein unemployed and jobless being the only source of earning livelihood of the for himself and his family owing to the unfair trade practices resorted to by the respondents besides causing tremendous mental pain and agony to the complainant appellant herein as also wastage of precious time and money.

2. Upon entertaining the compliant, the Commission summoned the respondent 1 herein and though initially complainant appellant herein had impleaded respondent 1 herein only as