M.SHREESHA, J. - (1.) Aggrieved by the order passed in Consumer Complaint No.71/2014 on the file of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Punjab, Chandigarh (in short, 'the State Commission'), The first Opposite Party preferred this Appeal under Section 19 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (in short, 'the Act'). By the impugned order, the State Commission partly allowed the Complaint with the direction to the Opposite Parties to rectify the defects with respect to the noise in the front wheel of the car within a period of one month, together with compensation of 15,000/ - and costs of 11,000/ -.
(2.) The brief facts as set out in the Complaint are that the Complainant purchased an Audi Q5 2.0 TDI QUAI IBIS vide Invoice No.11 -12 -V032, dated 31.08.2011, at a price of 40,43,000/ -, from the first Opposite Party. It is averred that immediately after purchase, the complainant noticed a continuous sound problem/ noise from the front side of the wheel during the application of the breaks. It is pleaded that despite several visits, the first Opposite Party miserably failed to rectify the said problem.
(3.) On 04.01.2012, the first Opposite Party retained the car in its workshop till 14.01.2012 and informed the Complainant that necessary parts have been changed and now, the front wheel would be sound -free. It is averred that the car had run only 5005 kms as on that date and even after the delivery of the car, the complainant faced the same problem and he had no other alternative but to approach the first Opposite Party again, which had retained the car and did the tyre rotation. Again, on 27.11.2012 and on 06.06.2013, when the car had driven 11,736 kms and 15,221 kms, respectively, the car was once again taken for rectifying the same defect, but in vain. The complainant submitted that on 04.02.2014, the car was taken to the first Opposite Party to set right the same problem, but it refused to rectify the same, unless the complainant had paid a sum of 44,300.68ps.;