By Smt. C.S. Sulekha Beevi, President,<br /> <br /> <br /> 1. Complainant is aggrieved that two tyres of the tractor purchased by him for earning livelihood has manufacturing defects. The two tyres fitted on the rear side of the tractor cracked while the tractor was in use on the fields. Complainant informed second opposite party about the defects. He was directed to inform 1st opposite party. Complainant approached 1st opposite party directly and reported about the defects. A person from the Company came and inspected the tyres and told that necessary steps would be taken to replace the tyres since the defects were manufacturing defects. Till date opposite party has not taken any steps to replace the tyres. Each tyre costs about Rs.11,000/- and were used only for about four months. Complainant could not use the tractor due to the defect of tyres and had to under go much hardships and financial loss. Hence this complaint claiming replacement of the defective tyres or refund of Rs.22,000/- with interest @ 18% and for compensation of Rs.50,000/- together with costs of Rs.2,000/-.<br /> <br /> 2. First opposite party has filed version admitting to be manufactures of CEAT tyres. It is submitted that the tyres are sold to dealers on a principal to principal basis and the conditions of sale are mentioned on the reverse side of the invoice. That first opposite party is not aware of the subsequent sales made by the dealer and that there is no privity of contract between opposite party and the customers of the dealer. That when any defect of tyres/tubes is reported to opposite party an inspection is conducted and thereafter adjustment or rejection of the claim is made after stating the reasons there of. When the tyre is of a size which cannot be transported the technical personnel of opposite party duly visits and convey their assessment. Subsequently complainant is called upon to lodge the tyre for detailed inspection or if satisfied with their findings on site, intimate their findings by a communication to the dealer with a copy endorsed to the complainant. Each and every claim item is properly attended and scrutinized. That opposite party is fully conscious of it's responsibility to the consumers. The averment that technical personnal of opposite party inspected the tyres and stated that there is manufacturing defect and offered replacement is denied by opposite party. It is submitted that opposite party has not received the tyres for inspection and has not been given an opportunity to inspect with regard to any manufacturing defect. That opposite party is not liable for the reliefs claimed. It is further submitted to direct the complainant to produce the tyres before opposite party for facilitating inspection and tests to determine the actual reason for failure of tyres. The complaint is to be dismissed.<br /> <br /> 3. Second opposite party has filed version admitting the sale of Mahindra and Mahindra Tractor to complainant on 31-3-2003. the date of purchase shown in the complaint is not correct. At the time of purchase of the Tractor complainant had selected a tractor with four CEAT tyres. That opposite party or the manufacturer have not given any warranty or guarantee to the accessories like Tyres, Tubes, Batteries etc. this is clear from 6th paragraph of manufacturer's warranty conditions. Opposite party did not receive any complaint about poor quality of tyres. Therefore opposite party has not directed complainant to contact 1st opposite party. Second opposite party came to know about this allegation only on receiving copy of complaint from this Forum. Opposite party is not liable to replace the tyres or pay the value of tyres. The complaint may be dismissed.<br /> <br /> 4. Both sides have filed affidavits by way of evidence. Exts.A1 and A2 marked for complainant. No documents marked for opposite parties. Either side has not adduced any oral evidence.<br /> <br /> 5. Points for consideration:-<br /> (i) Whether opposite parties have committed unfair trade practice.<br /> (ii) If so, reliefs and costs.<br /> <br /> 6. Point (i):-<br /> Complainant alleges manufacturing defects of two tyres fitted on the rear side of his Tractor KL-10/Q 2950. Both opposite parties have denied the allegation of manufacturing defects and also contends that complainant has not informed them about any such defects. It was reiterated by first opposite party in the affidavit that complainant has to be directed to produce the alleged tyres before opposite party for inspection and testing to find out what actually is the reason for defect of the tyres. The burden to prove manufacturing defects is definitely upon the complainant. He has not taken any steps to prove that the tyres have any manufacturing defects. Apart from the vague affirmation in the affidavit no evidence is tendered by complainant to substantiate and establish his case. There is no expert evidence before us to conclude that the tyres have manufacturing defects. Further in Ext.A1 the Registration number of the vehicle is noted as KL-10 Q/3100 whereas in the complaint the Registration number quoted by complainant is KL-10Q 2950. We hold that complainant has failed to establish a case in his favour.<br /> <br /> 7. In the result we dismiss the complaint with no order as to costs.<br /> <br /> Dated this 6th day of November, 2008.<br /> <br /> Sd/-<br /> C.S. SULEKHA BEEVI, PRESIDENT<br /> <br /> <br /> Sd/-<br /> MOHAMMED MUSTAFA KOOTHRADAN, Sd/-<br /> MEMBER E. AYISHAKUTTY, MEMBER<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> APPENDIX<br /> <br /> <br /> Witness examined on the side of the complainant : Nil <br /> Documents marked on the side of the complainant : Ext.A1 and A2<br /> Ext.A1 : Photo copy of the Certificate of Registration regarding vehicle <br /> No.KL10 Q/3100.<br /> Ext.A2 : Photo copy of the Delivery Acknowledgement dated, 31-3-2003<br /> from complainant to opposite party.<br /> Witness examined on the side of the opposite parties : Nil<br /> Documents marked on the side of the opposite parties : Nil<br /> <br /> Sd/-<br /> C.S. SULEKHA BEEVI, PRESIDENT<br /> <br /> <br /> Sd/-<br /> MOHAMMED MUSTAFA KOOTHRADAN, Sd/-<br /> MEMBER E. AYISHAKUTTY, MEMBER