Dentist to get Rs 72K for improper repair of his equipment

Home Forums Manufacturers, traders & trade fairs Dental equipment Dentist to get Rs 72K for improper repair of his equipment

Welcome Dear Guest

To create a new topic please register on the forums. For help contact : discussdentistry@hotmail.com

Currently, there are 0 users and 1 guest visiting this topic.
Viewing 1 post (of 1 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #10693
    Drsumitra
    Offline
    Registered On: 06/10/2011
    Topics: 238
    Replies: 542
    Has thanked: 0 times
    Been thanked: 0 times

    A Delhi-based firm which sells and repairs equipments used by dentists has been directed by a consumer forum here to pay Rs 72,200 to a dentist for not properly repairing his dental chair he had sent for mending.

    The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum observed that the machine was non-functional when it was returned after repairs to the dentist, Dr M M Khurana, as several essential parts were missing from it.

    East Delhi District Forum’s President N A Zaidi held the firm, R K Engineering Works, guilty of deficiency and unfair trade practice as it had caused loss to the dentist by not repairing the equipment.”Respondent (R K Engineering Works) has committed deficiency by not repairing the chair and by removing the parts it has indulged in unfair trade practice causing loss to a professional to whom the dental machine and chair are the necessary equipments for the purpose of discharging his services to the patients.

    “In the circumstances we grant a lump sump amount of Rs 50,000 to the complainant (Khurana) towards loss of practice /income on account of non-functioning of the machine. We further award a sum of Rs 19,200 towards cost of the missing parts and a sum of Rs 3,000 towards cost of litigation,” the forum said.

    Khurana in his complaint had said that he had bought a complete dental unit with chair for Rs one lakh from the firm in 1999 and that it carried a lifetime warranty.

    He added in April 2010 he had some problems with the machine and it was removed to the firm’s factory for repairs, adding that when it was returned as fully repaired he found that several essential parts were missing from it making it non-functional.

    The firm was proceeded against ex-parte by the forum as no one appeared for it despite issue of notice.

     

Viewing 1 post (of 1 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.