IN THE STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHENNAI PRESIDENT BEFORE : Hon’ble Thiru Justice R. SUBBIAH Tmt. Dr. S.M.LATHA MAHESWARI MEMBER COMMON ORDER IN F.A.NO.8/2015 AND FA.NO.32/2015 (Against order in CC.NO.29/2013 on the file of the DCDRC, Erode)

DATED THIS THE 28^th DAY OF JANUARY 2022 FA.NO.8/2015 Kirloskar Oil Engines Ltd., Rep. by its General Manager M/s.S. Parthasarathy Laxmanrao Kirloskar Road, Khadki Counsel for Pune – 411 003 Appellant / 1^st Opposite party Vs.

1. Dr. K.Natarajan S/o. P.G.Kalianna Gounder No.314, Bargur Road, Anthiyur M/s.B.Gopal & D. Raghul Bhavani Taluk- 638 501 Counsel for Erode District 1^st Respondent/ Complainant

2. M/s. Palaniappa Mill Stores Rep. by its Proprietor Authorised Distributor for Kirloskar M/s. I.C.Vasudevan HO 458, Nethaji Road Counsel for Erode – 638 001 Respondents / 2^nd Opposite party FA.NO.32/2015 M/s. Palaniappa Mill Stores Rep. by its Proprietor Authorised Distributor for Kirloskar M/s. I.C. Vasudevan HO 458, Nethaji Road Counsel for Erode – 638 001 Appellant / 2^nd Opposite party Vs.

1. Dr. K.Natarajan S/o. P.G.Kalianna Gounder No.314, Bargur Road, Anthiyur M/s.B.Gopal & D. Raghul Bhavani Taluk- 638 501 Counsel for Erode District 1^st Respondent/ Complainant

2. Kirloskar Oil Engines Ltd., Rep. by its General Manager Laxmanrao Kirloskar Road, Khadki Served called absent Pune – 411 003 2^nd Respondent / 1^st Opposite party The 2^nd Respondent/ complainant had filed a complaint before the District Commission against the opposite parties praying for certain direction. The District Forum allowed the complaint. Against the said order, these appeals have been preferred by the 1^st opposite party in FA.No.8/2015 and by the 2^nd opposite party in FA.No.32/2015 praying to set aside the order of the District Commission dt.28.8.2014 in CC.No.29/2013.

These appeals coming on before us for hearing finally today, upon hearing the arguments of both parties, perusing the documents, lower court records, and the order passed by the District Commission, this commission made the following common order:

JUSTICE R. SUBBIAH, PRESIDENT

1. These appeals have been filed by the 1^st and 2^nd opposite parties by separately viz.FA.No.8/2015 and FA.No.32/2015 respectively, against the order in CC.No.29/2013 dt.28.8.2014 praying to set aside the order impugned.

2. Since both the appeals are arising out of the same order, these appeals are disposed of by way of common order.

3. For the sake of convenience, the parties shall be referred as arrayed in the original complaint filed before the District Commission in CC.No.29/2013.

4. The brief facts which are necessary to decide the issues involved in the appeal are as follows:

The complainant is a doctor by profession. He is having his own hospital in the name of M/s. Natarajan Hospital at Anthiyur, Bhavani Taluk. The complainant approached the 2^nd opposite party on 17.12.2011 and sought for branded generators like Honda with warranty, as a standby arrangement to meet the power failure crises to the Hospital requirements which has EB capacity of 8 KVA. The 2^nd opposite party promoted Kirloskar Engine as a fast moving product and also advised that it will suit to the requirements of the complainant. Hence believing the words of the complainant, the complainant was forced to buy the said product. At the time of raising the bill, the complainant requested them to raise the bill in the name of the Hospital, for which purpose the product was purchased. But the 2^nd opposite party stated that the product will attract the enhanced rate of VAT and so the individual name will be suffice to fulfill the tax obligations thereto. Therefore believing the words of the opposite parties, the complainant allowed for the same. The invoice was raised for an amount of Rs.115000/- by the 2^nd opposite party. The 2^nd opposite party had also sent their officials for installation. Trial run was also made. At that time the engine was running with unusual noise. When this was pointed out by the com