Decided on September 26,2003

T.RAJA SEKHAR Respondents


P.RAMAKRISHNAM RAJU,PRESIDENT - (1.) THE opposite parties in C.D. No. 1000/1999 on the file of District Consumer Forum -II, Hyderabad are the appellants.
(2.) THE complainant purchased Bajaj Kawasaki 45 Champion vehicle bearing No. AP 11 -F 771 on 23.3.1998. Although at the time of purchase the opposite parties assured that the vehicle is fuel efficient and would achieve the mileage of 87 kms. per litre of petrol but in effect it was giving only 56 to 58 kms. Hence he filed the complaint. The District Forum directed the appellants to carry out the necessary repairs to ensure the promised mileage or in the alternative replace the vehicle with a new one together with compensation of Rs. 2,000/ - and costs of Rs. 1,000/ -. Hence the appeal.
(3.) EX . A1 is the booklet issued by the opposite parties to the complainant at the time of purchase of the vehicle noting the Chassis Number, Engine Number, date of purchase, address of the purchaser etc. Hence the purchase by the complainant is established. Later the complainant took the vehicle for free service on number of times. Exs. A1(a) to Ex. A1(e) are counter -foils showing the dates on which the vehicle was serviced including the repairs. Ex. A2 is the legal notice dated 12.8.1999. The main contention of the complainant is that though the opposite parties gave an assurance under Ex. A3 dated 21.1.2002 that the vehicle would give mileage of 87 kms. per litre of petrol, but he was thoroughly disappointed as it is only giving 56 to 58 kms. Even after all the free services were done there was no improvement. Therefore, the complainant is justified in approaching the District Forum. Though the complainant filed his affidavit in support of the allegations in the complaint the appellants neither filed written version nor affidavit evidence. The complainant filed documents Exs. A1 to A4 to establish the purchase of the vehicle as well as the declaration given by the opposite parties that the vehicle is fuel efficient which would run 87 kms. per litre of petrol. This evidence of the complainant has not been challenged. Hence the District Forum accepting the uncontroverted evidence of the complainant allowed the complaint and directed the appellants to rectify the defects or alternatively replace the vehicle together with compensation of Rs. 2,000/ - and costs of Rs. 1,000/ -. Instead of doing that this appeal is filed. We do not find any ground to interfere with the order of the District Forum. The appeal, therefore, fails and is accordingly dismissed. For any reason the appellants are unable to comply with the order of the District Forum the complainant is entitled to recover the cost of the vehicle with interest at 18% together with compensation and costs as awarded by the District Forum. Time for compliance 6 weeks. Appeal dismissed. ;

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.