DAGADU BHAIRU BHOSALE Vs. SCOOTER INDIA LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner was the complainant before the District Forum, where he had filed a complaint alleging deficiency in service on the part of the respondents. While the respondent No. 1 is the manufacturer of the three-wheeler, the respondent No. 2 is the authorised dealer of M/s. Scooter India Ltd.

(2.) Very briefly the facts leading to filing the complaint were that the complainant purchased a chassis of three-wheeler on which a body was got fitted from a private fabricator. Once he started plying the vehicle, he found difficulty in starting the vehicle. It was his case that there were several manufacturing defects in the vehicle which were neither removed by the opposite party, nor were they willing to replace the vehicle, hence the complaint was filed before the District Forum, who after hearing the parties, dismissed the complaint. An appeal filed before the State Commission met with the same fate, hence this revision petition before us.

(3.) It was argued before us by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that there was no problem with the body but basically on account of defective three-wheeler supplied to the petitioner, that poor man could not start his business. He drew our attention to several bills and also the contents therein. According to the learned Counsel, they are indicative of manufacturing defect and secondly his case was that he was made to pay for these repairs within the warranty period.