The present complaint has been filed by the titled complainant Sh. Bhupinder Singh, a young agriculturist of Village: Ladha Munda (Batala) against the titled i) opposite party1 Mahindra & Mahindra a Public Limited Co., the Farm Tractor Manufacturers through its Managing Director and ii) the opposite party No.2 Tractor Vendor through its Br. Manager for having allegedly sold/delivered him the Mahindra 605 DI Arjun Ultra 57 H.P. Model 2020 Tractor infested with inherently defective/ obsolete equipments like i) Defective Motor Starter and ii) Obsolete 2019 Model Non-Adjustable Axel; and has further sought directives to the herein opposite parties to replace the ‘defective/obsolete’ said equipment of his Tractor with the Fresh/New Model Equipment Parts; and/or to replace the Tractor, itself; besides to pay him Rs.5.0 Lac as compensation, punitive damages and cost of litigation.
2. The complainant further claims to have purchased the new Mahindra Tractor from the OP2 Vendor on 09.06.2020 vide Invoice No.37 (Ex.C1) for Rs.6.77 Lac and of which the Key-Self Starter (Motor Starter) ceased functioning shortly within a few days of purchase. The OP2 repaired the non-functional Motor Starter but refused to replace the same even at the request/insistence of the complainant that the Tractor has been very much in the warranty period. Shortly thereafter one complainant’s friend (Tractor Mechanic) examined the Tractor and told that its Key-Self Starter is not ‘original’ as Mahindra uses Lucas Make Motor Starters whereas his starter has been of ER Make; the mechanic friend further told that his Tractor has been 2019 Model as it has been fitted with Non-Adjustable Axel that has been an obsolete assembly for 2020 Model that get coupled with the Adjustable Axel.
3. The complainant approached the OP2 Vendors and confronted them with the true factums but they refused to listen and redress any of the above grievances. The complainant, then moved an application (Ex.C2) before the Secretary, District Legal Service Authority, where the OP2 admitted the Tractor to be 2019 Model/Key-Self Starter defective (repaired-okay) but refused refund/replacement and thus the application was returned as unsettled.
4. Presently, the complainant has filed the instant complaint along with his affidavit (Ex.CW1/A) and exhibited documents (Ex.C1/Ex.C2) in evidence, for successful prosecution of the same, praying for the here-in-above sought reliefs alongwith rejoinder and written arguments.
5. Upon notice/summoning by the commission, the opposite party No.1 Manufacturers preferred not to put-in their appearance in spite of the due service in accordance with the statutory procedure and as such the OP1 were ordered to be proceeded against ex-parte vide the interim orders dated 21.07.2022.
6. The OP2 Vendors upon summoning appeared through their counsel and filed the written reply comprised of the preliminary as well other (on-merits) objections that are summarized hereunder so as to retain the original fidelity to the feasible extent as: That the complainant has been guilty of concealment of material facts from this commission and that disentitles him to any relief and the complaint becomes/ gets liable to be dismissed on this ground alone. That the complainant had purchased and taken delivery of the Tractor on 19.02.2020 by paying Rs.1.99 Lac only and had paid the balance on 19.04.2020 and he had duly expressed his satisfaction by willfully signing the Customer- Satisfaction (Ex.OP2/1) Certificate on 19.02.2020. That the complainant has never complained of any defect in the Self Key-Start Motor Starter nor has got his Tractor repaired/serviced after its purchase. That the Tractor was sold as Model 2019 Tractor (Ex.OP2/1) not 2020 Model as has been clearly indicated on the above Customer Satisfaction Certificate. That the complainant filed his complaint with Secretary, District Legal Service Authority before whom it was admitted that Tractor has been of 2019 Model.
7. The OP2 Vendors have denied all other contents/allegations as were put forth in the complaint. Lastly, the OP2 have also filed their affidavit (Ex.OPW2/A) along with the above certificate (Ex.OP2/1) and pray for dismissal of the present complaint with costs.
8. We have carefully examined the documents/evidence produced on record (along with the scale and scope of ‘adverse inference’ for those not produced/ignored to be produced) in order to determine the respective ‘claims’ as pleaded forth by the opposing litigants in the light of the partial preliminary arguments as advanced by their respective learned counsels representing the two respective sides. 9. We observe that it has been in the active notice and knowledge of the complainant that he has been going in for the purchase of the 2019 Model Tractor as has been vividly evidenced by virtue of the certificate exhibited as Ex.OP2/1. And, further the OP2 Vendors have not produced any cogent evidence in support of their claim that 2019 Model Tractor as sold by them has been fitted with a Reversible Axcel.
10. However, after hearing final arguments today, we are of this considered opinion that this complaint can be best disposed off by giving directions to the parties. Hence the OP2 Vendors can be directed to change the Key Self Starter (Motor Starter) of the complainant’s Tractor with a Fresh New Lucas Key-Self Starter (Motor Starter) and the old Axel with the one Brand New Reversible Axel at its own cost/expense for the sake of Mahindra Reputation and in the name of Mahindra Customer Service whensoever the complainant brings his Tractor to the Mahindra Authorized Workshop at the OP2 vendor premises.
11. In the light of the all above, we ORDER disposal of the present complaint with no order as to its cost in the manner that the complainant shall leave his Tractor at the OP2 Vendor Workshop within thirty (30) days of the receipt of these orders and the OP2 Vendor, in turn, shall replace its Key-Self Starter (Motor Starter) with the one Brand New Lucas Motor Starter and its Axel with the one Brand New Reversible Axel within the next five (5) working days at zero cost to the complainant. The OP2 is at liberty to claim any reimbursement from OP1 as per their internal arrangements if any in view of this order.
12. The complaint could not be decided within the stipulated period due to heavy pendency of Court Cases, vacancies in the office and due to pandemic of Covid-19.
13. Copy of the order be communicated to the parties free of charges. After compliance, file be consigned to record.
(Naveen Puri)
President.
ANNOUNCED: (B.S.Matharu)
JAN. 12, 2023. Member.
YP.
