BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SIRSA.
Consumer Complaint no. 28 of 2015.
Date of Institution : 29.1.2015.
Date of Decision : 04.01.2017.
Dhapi Devi wife of Shri Sandeep Kumar, resident of village Nuhianwali, Tehsil Dabwali, District Sirsa.
……Complainant.
Versus.
- J.M. Motors, through its Prop. Authorized Person Authorized Dealer Escorts Farmtrac Tractor, Hisar Road, Sirsa.
2. Escorts India Private Ltd. Agriculture Machinery Marketing Division, 18/4 Mathura Road Faridabad 121007 (Haryana).
...…Opposite parties.
Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act,1986.
Before: SHRI S.B.LOHIA…………………PRESIDENT
SHRI RANBIR SINGH PANGHAL………..……MEMBER.
Present: Sh. Vinod Kamboj, Advocate for the complainant.
Sh. Rishi Sharma, Advocate for opposite parties.
ORDER
Case of the complainant, in brief, is that the complainant purchased Farmtrac tractor of escorts company bearing engine No.E2315312 and chassis No.T052310964 from opposite party no.1 for a sum of Rs.5,80,000/- vide bill No.1109 dated 13.5.2014 with guarantee/ warranty of two years. However, after the purchase of tractor, the complainant was shocked to detect major problem in the tractor as its colour started removing of its own without any attack of sun light or any kind of striking or damage to the tractor. Besides that, there were cracks and wrinkles over the body of the tractor. There is manufacturing defect in the tractor or there is possibility that ops have supplied accidental/ repainted tractor to the complainant. The complainant also complained to op no.1 but he failed to take any positive step on the matter. The ops are guilty for selling defective/ damaged tractor to the complainant and she has suffered a lot of harassment and financial loss. The complainant took number of rounds to the office of op no.1 and also got served legal notice upon ops on 18.11.2014 but to no effect. Hence, this complaint.
2. On notice, opposite party no.1 replied that tractor was covered under a warranty of one year or 1500 hours whichever is earlier from the date of sale. The complainant purchased the tractor after taking trial in field and satisfying with its quality and condition. Further since the date of purchase, complainant availed two normal untimely service and on both the occasions did not raise any problem in the tractor including problem of paint peel off or wrinkles and cracks. The complainant only on 30.6.2014 visited op no.1 with petty and normal problem of leakage in front timing seal which was immediately replaced with complete satisfaction of complainant. It clearly shows that there was no problem of paint peel off/ chip off and wrinkles and cracks as alleged by complainant. The complainant since beginning stayed lenient/ irregular and failed to avail the mandatory free services in time. This is evident from the documents that the complainant availed first free service on 12.5.2014 after plying the tractor for 60 hours (10 hours extra) and on 8.11.2014 after plying the same for 310 hours (10 hours extra). The ops even then acting swiftly and towards consumer care and concern provided the complainant with swift and satisfactory services and the complainant’s signatures on respective job cards validate this submission of answering op. By no stretch of imagination it can be said that the tractor is defective and suffering with problems. As per terms of the warranty, the answering op is not liable for any replacement out of warranty or defects arising due to the negligence of complainant which includes non following of the mandatory service schedule, mishandling of tractor and availing service from unauthorized mechanic. The warranty is also not applicable on proprietary items like the tyres, fuel ignition pump, battery and other electrical items and complainant should prefer the same directly to the respective manufacturers.
3. Opposite party no.2 filed separate written statement on the similar lines as that of opposite party no.1.
4. The complainant tendered her affidavit Ex.C1, legal notice Ex.C2, postal receipts Ex.C3, Ex.C4, copy of bill Ex.C5, copy of loan schedule Ex.C6, copy of payment receipt Ex.C7, copy of invoice dated 8.11.2014 Ex.C8, copy of another invoice dated 8.11.2014 Ex.C9, copy of payment receipt Ex.C10, copy of registration certificate Ex.C11. On the other hand, ops tendered affidavit Ex.R1/A, authorization letter Ex.R1, copy of bill Ex.R2, copy of delivery document Ex.R3, copy of warranty card Ex.R4 and copies of job cards Ex.R5 to Ex.R7 and affidavit Ex.RW2/A.
5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the case file carefully.
6. The complainant has alleged that after purchase of tractor in question on 13.5.2014, its colour started peeling off and same has occurred due to manufacturing defect in the tractor or the reason of the same may be that ops have supplied accidental/ old tractor to her. However, the complainant has failed to prove her allegations by way of cogent and reliable evidence. There is no expert opinion on the file to prove that there is manufacturing defect in the tractor in question or that ops have supplied accidental tractor to her. The complainant or his representative has not reported such type of defect to the opposite parties in the job card dated 30.6.2014 Ex.R6 and at the time of second free service which was got done on 8.11.2014 vide job card Ex.R7. The complainant has not even produced any photograph of the tractor in question to substantiate her plea. The complainant has sought refund of the price of the tractor in question but she has failed to prove that tractor in question is having any manufacturing defect. At the most the opposite parties can be directed to repair the tractor in question and to make it defect free after replacement of defective parts, if any free of costs as complainant has filed the present complaint within warranty period.
7. Thus, as a sequel to our above discussion, we partly allow the present complaint and direct the opposite parties to repair the tractor in question and to make it defect free after replacement of defective parts, if any and do paint if colour is removed from any parts of the tractor free of costs. This order should be complied by the opposite parties within a period of one month after production of tractor to them by the complainant who has to produce the tractor before the ops as early as possible. A copy of this order be supplied to the parties free of costs. File be consigned to record room.
Announced in open Forum. President,
Dated:04.01.2017. Member. District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Forum, Sirsa
