Haryana

StateCommission

A/891/2016

ESCORTS TRACTORS LTD. - Complainant(s)

Versus

ANAND BHUSHAN - Opp.Party(s)

RECEIVED FROM NCDRC,NEW DELHI

20 Jan 2017

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION HARYANA, PANCHKULA

                                                 

                                     First Appeal No  :   891 & 891A of 2016

Date of Institution:  01.09.2016

                                     Date of Decision:   20.01.2017

 

 

Appeal No.891 of 2016

 

 

 

Escorts Tractors Limited, 15/5, Mathura Road, Faridabad, Haryana.

                             Appellant-Opposite Party No.2

Versus

 

1.      Anand Bhushan

2.      Sarwan Kumar

          Both sons of Sh. Om Parkash, residents of Village Gobindpura, Tehsil Jagadhari, District Yamuna Nagar.

Respondents-Complainants

 

3.      The Yamuna Syndicate Limited, Agri Machinery Marketing Division, 184, Mathura Road, Faridabad, Haryana.

Respondent-Opposite Party No.1

 

 

Appeal No.891 of 2016

 

 

The Yamuna Syndicate Limited, Agri Machinery Marketing Division, 184, Mathura Road, Faridabad, Haryana.

Appellant -Opposite Party No.1

Versus

 

1.      Anand Bhushan

2.      Sarwan Kumar

          Both sons of Sh. Om Parkash, residents of Village Gobindpura, Tehsil Jagadhari, District Yamuna Nagar.

Respondents-Complainants

 

3.      Escorts Tractors Limited, 15/5, Mathura Road, Faridabad, Haryana.

Respondent-Opposite Party No.2

 

 

CORAM:   Hon’ble Mr. Justice Nawab Singh, President.

                   Mr. B.M. Bedi, Judicial Member.

 

Present:     Mr. A.K. Bishnoi, Advocate for Escorts Tractors Limited-opposite party No.2

                   Mr. Tarun Ahuja, Advocate for respondents-complainants.

                   Mr. Manoj Kumar Pundir, Advocate for The Yamuna Syndicate Limited-opposite party No.1

                                                   O R D E R

 

NAWAB SINGH J.(ORAL)

 

This order disposes of afore-mentioned appeals bearing No.891 filed by Escorts Tractors Limited-opposite party No.2 (Manufacturer) and 891A of 2016 filed by The Yamuna Syndicate Limited-opposite party No.1 (Dealer) because they have arisen out of common order dated September 26^th, 2007 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Yamuna Nagar (for short, ‘District Forum’), in complaint No.1103 of 2006 filed by Anand Bhushan and Sarwan Kumar-complainants.  The complaint was allowed directing the manufacturer and dealer to replace the tractor Farmtrac 60 DX purchased by the complainants on October 28^th, 2005, with new one and to pay Rs.11,000/- litigation expenses to the complainants.

2.      Against the order of the District Forum, Manufacturer filed appeal No.3376 of 2007 before this Commission and the said appeal was dismissed vide order dated March 03^rd, 2009 by the Hon’ble Mr. Justice R.S. Madan, President (as he then was).

3.      Dealer also filed appeal No.2991 of 2007 challenging the order of District Forum dated September 26^th, 2007.  The said appeal was accepted vide order dated January 12^th, 2011 by the Hon’ble Mr. Justice R.S. Madan, President (as he then was) setting aside the order of the District Forum by directing the Manufacturer to replace the defective parts of the tractor.

4.        Against the aforesaid order dated March 03^rd, 2009 of this Commission, Manufacturer filed Revision Petition No.2516 of 2009 and the complainants filed Revision Petition No.1516 of 2011 against the order dated January 12^th, 2011 before Hon’ble National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi. 

5.      The National Commission vide order dated August 09^th, 2016 remitted the case to this Commission to pass an order afresh in appeals filed by the Manufacturer and Dealer because this Commission passed two contradictory orders in the case.

6.      Today, Shri Tarun Ahuja, learned counsel for the complainants has made the statement (Annexure 1), which reads as under:-

          “The complainants would be satisfied, if the defects in the tractor Farmtrac 60 DX bearing Chassis No.T2044689 and Engine No.2045774 as mentioned in report (Exhibit C-7) are removed by the Escorts Tractors Limited-opposite party No.1 and Yamuna Syndicate Limited-opposite party No.2 free of cost.”

7.      In face of it, learned counsel for the Manufacturer and Dealer have also made the following joint statement (Annexure 2):-

          “Yamuna Syndicate Limited-opposite party No.1 and Escorts Tractors Limited-opposite party No.2 are ready to remove the defects in the tractor Farmtrac 60 DX bearing Chassis No.T2044689 and Engine No.2045774 as mentioned in report (Exhibit C-7) free of cost.  After repair of the tractor, two engineers of Escorts Tractors Limited would examine and issue a certificate to the complainants with respect to the repair.” 

8.      In view of the statements of learned counsel for the parties, referred to above, the order dated September 26^th, 2007 passed by District Forum is modified to the extent that Manufacturer and Dealer would remove the defects in the tractor Farmtrac 60 DX bearing Chassis No.T2044689 and Engine No.2045774 as mentioned in report (Exhibit C-7) free of cost. After repair of the tractor, two Engineers of Escorts Tractors Limited-manufacturer would examine and issue a certificate to the complainants with respect to the repair made by them.  Both the appeals stand disposed of in the manner indicated above.

9.      Certified copy of this order be placed in the file of Appeal No.891 of 2016.

 

Announced 20.01.2017

(B.M. Bedi) Judicial Member

(Nawab Singh) President

U.K