Machine failed, business suffered: Kerala entrepreneur wins ₹75,000 after three-year battle over ₹25 lakh equipment

A Kerala entrepreneur who spent ₹25 lakh on an automated bottling machine but could not use it properly from the first day has won relief from a consumer commission. The Palakkad District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission has directed the manufacturer to replace the machine and pay ₹75,000 as compensation and legal expenses, according to a report by The Indian Express.

The commission was hearing a complaint filed by SKS Foods, a proprietary concern based in Kanjikode, Palakkad, against Ernakulam-based Abhilash Industries over an automated bottle-filling and cap-sealing machine purchased in June 2023.

The entrepreneur, Sajitha E G, had bought the machine to improve production and reduce labour costs. However, she claimed that the equipment failed to work properly from the beginning due to poor installation, faulty programming and inadequate after-sales support.

“When the complainant purchases machinery with the intention to enhance her business facilities by availing financial assistance, such purchase is made with great expectation as to betterment of their lifestyle. In the present case, the complainant was left suffering,” the commission said in its July 17 order.

Don't Miss: Bengaluru restaurants to boycott Swiggy, Zomato from August 15. Here's why

The commission, headed by president Vinay Menon V along with members Vidya A and Krishnankutty N K, said the machine itself did not have a manufacturing defect. However, it held that the company failed to provide proper installation and after-sales service.

Machine bought to increase business capacity

According to the complaint, Sajitha purchased an automatic four-head volumetric bottle-filling machine, an automatic screw-cap sealing machine and related accessories from Abhilash Industries on June 27, 2023.

The total cost of the equipment was ₹25,01,600. The machine came with a one-year warranty and was purchased with financial assistance from a bank.

The entrepreneur said the company had promised that the machine could fill 1,000 litres of concentrate every hour, helping her reduce her workforce by five employees.

However, she alleged that the machine did not perform as promised. The filling quantity was inconsistent, bottles overflowed, caps were not sealed properly and the equipment remained unusable.

She approached the commission seeking a refund of the purchase price, reimbursement of bank interest, labour expenses and compensation for losses and mental agony.

Company denied manufacturing defect

Abhilash Industries argued that the complaint was not valid as the machine was purchased for commercial use. The company also denied any manufacturing defect and said its employees had trained the operator and provided support whenever required.

The manufacturer claimed that the issues occurred because the complainant’s staff was not properly trained to operate the machinery. It also said it was ready to fix any genuine problems with the equipment.

Expert inspection finds service issues

To understand the cause of the problem, the consumer commission appointed an expert to inspect the machine.

During testing, only three out of 12 bottles were filled correctly. Six bottles overflowed, while the remaining bottles were partially filled. The capping system also repeatedly stopped during operation.

The expert concluded that the problems were not due to any manufacturing defect.

Based on the findings, the commission said the manufacturer was responsible for poor installation, calibration issues and inadequate after-sales service.

The commission also rejected the company’s argument that the complaint could not be filed because the machine was bought for business use.

It noted that the machine had remained unused for more than three-and-a-half years despite being purchased through bank finance, preventing the entrepreneur from gaining the benefits she expected from the investment.

No refund, but replacement ordered

Since there was no manufacturing defect, the commission refused to order a refund of the machine’s cost, bank interest or labour expenses.

Instead, it directed Abhilash Industries to replace the machine with an identical one within 45 days.

The company was also ordered to pay ₹50,000 as compensation for deficiency in service and ₹25,000 towards litigation costs, taking the total relief amount to ₹75,000.

The commission further said that if the company fails to comply within 45 days, the complainant will receive an additional solatium of ₹1,000 per month or part of a month from the date of the order until compliance.

Consumer takeaway

The case highlights that buying machinery for a small business does not mean a buyer loses consumer rights. If equipment fails due to poor installation, calibration problems or lack of after-sales support, consumers can approach consumer commissions for replacement and compensation under the Consumer Protection Act.

For consumer-related complaints, people can contact the National Consumer Helpline at 1915 or their respective state consumer helplines. In Kerala, consumers can reach the helpline at 1800-425-1550.