JUDGMENT

1. The present complaint has been filed by the complainant before this commission for

1. Ops be directed to replace the car by the new one or to pay its value Rs.875000 with interest and cost of litigation Rs.100000.
2.  Ops be directed to pay the  compensation Rs.200000 for intimidation by demanding the unauthorized fees.

2. The Complainant has stated that he has purchased a Maruti Suzki  Discover Car on 6.10.2022 for Rs.732172 with Insurance and RTO fees amounting Rs. 142828 total Rs.875000. In test drive a new car was used whereas the defective car was delivered. Complainant came to know about this fact when he had gone on 26.10.2022 for outing with his wife by car, the car suddenly stopped at Kalindi Batla House, Delhi Highway. Complainant inform the service center and a mechanic reached there and he started the car. It was told by the mechanic the engine of car was defective. Complainant served the ops with legal notice dated 3.11.2022. Complainant told the op no.1 the cause of stopping the car a defective engine, he misbehaved with the complainant and kicked the complainant out. Complainant was intimidated  by the op through reply notice 4.11.2022.                   
3. Op no.1 stated in WS that the complainant has purchased the car having fully satisfied and the car was a new car. Complainant had brought the car at the service center and he had gone having fully satisfied. The complainant had taken the adulterated petrol from some petrol pump whereby the defect had arisen in the car. There is no manufacturing defect in the car and the allegations are false and fabricated.
4. Op no.2 and 3 have not contest the case despite of sufficient service.
5. Op no.4 stated in WS that no cause of action has arisen to the complainant to file the complaint against the insurance company and complainant has unnecessarily impleaded the insurance company in the case and the complaint is bad for non joinder of the parties.           
6. Complainant has filed his affidavit and papers in support of his pleadings. Op no. 1&4 have also filed affidavit in support of their pleadings.
7. We have perused the material available on record and heard the parties counsel.
8. The first question of consideration before us is whether the complainant is entitled to any relief?
9. Complainant as alleged that the car had suddenly stopped at the highway and defect in the engine of the car was removed by the mechanic of the Maruti Service Center who reached there on call made by the complainant. This fact has not been specifically denied by the op and it was simply stated that the cause of stopping the car was the petrol which was adulterated. There is no proof of use of the adulterated petrol. Thus the allegation of the complainant is established and the op no.1 is found to have sold the defective car and is liable to replace it by new car or the same model or to pay the amount Rs.875000 with pendente lite and future interest @12% per anuum.     

10. The question formulated above is decided  in favor of the complainant.
11. We hereby direct the op no.1 replace car by new car or the same model or to pay the amount Rs.875000 with pendente lite and future interest @7% per annum. Op no.1 also pay Rs.5000 as litigation expenses.   
12. Op shall comply with the directions within 45 days failing which Ops shall be prosecuted for non-compliance in accordance with section 72 of the Act for awarding punishment against him.
13. A copy of this judgment be provided to all the parties as per rule as mandated by Consumer Protection Act, 2019. The judgment be uploaded forthwith on the website of the commission for the perusal of the parties.
14. File be consigned to record room along with a copy of this judgment.