NCDRC

NCDRC

RA/16/2014

TATA MOTORS - Complainant(s)

Versus

RAJESH TYAGI - Opp.Party(s)

M/S. KARANJAWALA & CO.

24 Jan 2014

ORDER

NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
NEW DELHI
 
REVIEW APPLICATION NO. 16 OF 2014
 
IN
RP/1030/2008
1. TATA MOTORS
...........Appellants(s)
Versus 
1. RAJESH TYAGI
...........Respondent(s)

BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. CHAUDHARI, PRESIDING MEMBER
 HON'BLE MR. DR. B.C. GUPTA, MEMBER

For the Appellant :
For the Respondent :

Dated : 24 Jan 2014
ORDER

This review petition filed by Rajesh Tyagi, respondent no. 1 has been duly examined. The review petitioner has stated that the defect had erupted in the said vehicle within a very short time of purchase and within the warranty period but the OPs had failed to cure the same. The State Commission as well as this Commission had concurrently observed that the car suffered from the defect and the OPs failed to cure the same despite repeated visits to them. However, giving them one more opportunity to cure the defect in the car, as envisaged by the order dated 3.12.2013, passed by this Commission, would throw the litigation back to square one, starting the whole dispute and claim afresh on the same set of facts once again. 2. The facts and circumstances of the case have been examined once again. Vide order dated 3.12.2013, passed by this Commission, it has been directed as follows:- 0. Based on the discussion above, we find that it shall be in the fitness of things if the petitioner and respondent no. 2 dealer who has chosen not to put appearance before this Commission, jointly make an endeavour to remove the defects in the vehicle and give a clear-cut certificate signed by a senior officer of the manufacturer, not below the rank of a General Manager, declaring in categorical terms that the vehicle is free from any defects. We, therefore, order accordingly and manufacturer and the dealer are permitted to carry out the necessary repairs in the vehicle, make it defect-free and hand it over to the consumer along with the certificate as mentioned above within a period of three months from today. 11. List on 21.03.2014 for compliance. 3. It is clear from the above that the manufacturer and the dealer have been given the opportunity to remove the defects in the vehicle, make it defect-free and hand it over to the review petitioner-alongwith a certificate declaring in categorical terms that the vehicle is free from any defect. The case has also been listed for compliance on 21.03.2014. We do not find any justification to amend this order on any ground. The review petition is, therefore, ordered to be dismissed.

 
......................J
K.S. CHAUDHARI
PRESIDING MEMBER
......................
DR. B.C. GUPTA
MEMBER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.