ORDER BY HON’BLE MEMBER- MRS. M. SWAIN:
JUDGMENT
Complainant has filed this consumer complaint U/s.35 of C.P. Act, 2019 seeking following reliefs;
“Direct the opposite parties No.1 to 4 to replace the Tractor bearing regd. No.OD-21-M-1580 and replace the damaged tires or to remove the manufacturing defect of the engine along with new tyres of the front side, which are damaged and further direct the opposite parties No.1 to 4 to issue the warrantee cards of the tractor by extending the warrantee or guarantee periods of two years and direct the opposite party No.5 not to impose O.D., and banking interest over sanctioning loan, if the payment of EMI are irregular and the compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- for deficiency of service, gross negligence and unfair trade practice along with cost of litigation amount of Rs.20,000/- against the opposite parties No.1 to 4”.
The grievance of the complaint in brief that, the complainant is an educated unemployed person of his locality having his no source of income, he was incurred a loan from the opposite party No.5 (HDFC Bank, Jagatsinghpur) to purchase a new Tractor & Trailler for maintaining his livelihood.
According, the complainant availed a loan from the opposite party No.5 & visited to the O.P No.3 is called as the Odisha Agro. Industries Ltd, Satyanagar, Bhubaneswar and purchased the Swaraj Tractor-735-F.E. JX-PDS-540 of (MAHINDRA & MAHINDRA LTD) the O.P No.1 under the Agricultural subsidies scheme from the Odisha Agro Industries Ltd, Jagatsinghpur with cost of Rs.5,86,185/- through invoice and as per the guide line of the Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd the O.P No.4 (the Authorized Dealer of the Company) the said tractor delivered to the complainant with all the relevant papers. So, the complainant started payment of 1st EMI on dtd.24.11.2020 to the O.P No.5 HDFC Bank concerned and the said tractor was registered with the R.T.O, Jagatsinghpur on dtd.15.12.2020.
The complainant is further alleged that after running of few months from the date of delivery of the tractor, the front side of the tyres became damaged for which the complainant the owner of the tractor was intimated to the O.P No.4, so also to the O.P No.1 to 3 about the situation of the tyres and he was also made service in four times. In spite of that, the O.P No.1 to 4 did not taken any steps. So, finding no alternative way the complainant was served legal notice to O.P No.1 to 4 on dtd.01.09.2021 by Regd. Post with A/D fixing in 15 days time for taking necessary steps towards damage of this tractor. In spite of that, the O.P No.1 to 4 did not respond the legal notice. So, non-responding of the legal notice, the cause of action arose on dtd.17.09.2021 and the complaint is within the Guarantee & warranty periods. The purchased SWARAJ Tractor-735-FE-JXPDS bearing Regd. No.OD-21-M-1580 bearing Engine No.CJ-1354/LK/007426 and Chassis No.MENA-J4BAFLPK51002 became stood in OFF-Road status.
Hence the complainant prayed to replace the damaged tyres of the Tractor and remove the manufacturing problems and to extend the warranty periods and for the heavy loss sustained by the complainant due to damage of tyres along with unfair trade practice & deficiency of service. The complainant claims the compensation amount of Rs.2,00,000/- and the amount of Rs.20,000/- for this litigation against the O.P No.1 to 4 exonerating the O.P No.5 & 6.
The Opposite Parties received the notice from this Commission for appearance & submitting the written version. But the Opposite parties did not appear in this Commission for which it amounts to violation of natural justice. Latter they have set ex-parte on reported calls on dtd.29.07.2022.
The complainant has submitted the relevant documents, photographs of the damaged tyres at the times of filling of the compliant and he was also shown the photograph about condition of the tyres.
The Opposite parties No.1 to 4 did not submitted any documents and not appeared personally or though their advocate.
Heard the case of the complainant ex-parte at length by observing the documentary evidence of the complainant.
In view of the facts and circumstances, it is observed that the documentary evidence of the complainant is reasonable & relevant and is in support of the complainant. The opposite parties have got wrongful attitude due to non-appearance in this Commission and set ex-parte. The opposite parties No.1 to 4 did not think about the interest of their bonafied customers, despite of several efforts. Although the complainant has filed the consumer dispute within the warranty periods of two years under such circumstances the complainant has been sustained huge financial loss due to damage of tyres of the SWARAJ TRACTOR bearing Regd. No.OD-21-M1580.
In our opinion, we direct the opposite parties No.1 to 4 to replace the damaged tyres of the Tractor and remove the manufacturing problem of the Engine within the one month from the date of receipt of the order and extend the warranty periods of one year and we direct the opposite parties No.1 to 4 to replace the damaged tires at their own cost within one month positively.
Beside this above orders, although the complainant in purchased the tractor, by incurring loan from the O.P No.5 and paying E.M.I including interest regularly, so the O.P No.1 to 4 squarely liable to pay compensation amount for deficiency of service & unfair trade practice along with cost of litigation amount of Rs.5000/-.
Pronounced in the open Commission on this 21st Dec.,2022.
