Heard learned counsel for both the sides.

2.              This appeal is  filed  U/S-15 of erstwhile  Consumer Protection Act,1986(herein-after called the Act). Hereinafter, the parties to this appeal shall be referred to  with reference to their respective status before the learned District Forum.

3.             The factual matrix leading to the  case of  the complainant, is that  the complainant has purchased  a  Tata 410 Ex of LP 410 FBV City Ride bus  bearing No.OR-06-J-1448  on payment of due consideration. It is  alleged by the complainant that the vehicle gave defect  on 4.10.2012 and 6.10.2012. On 7.11.2012 the vehicle also gave some problem. After giving some trouble  the matter was reported to the OP, who repaired the vehicle on payment  of cost from the OP. But the defects are not removed, the complainant approached several times, but no fruitful result came out. Hence, the complaint was filed.

4.            OP No.3 did not file any written version.  The  OP  No.1 & 2     filed written version stating that  the allegation  of the  complainant was vague  and vehicle has been repaired after the condition of the warranty already exhausted.  Therefore, they have no deficiency in service on their part.

5.                       After hearing both the parties, learned District Forum   passed the following order:-

               Xxxx              xxxx              xxxx

                              “The consumer complaint filed by the complainant is allowed on contest against the Opp.Parties No.1 & 2  and exparte as against OP No.3. The Opp.Parties are hereby directed to pay the cost of the Assy. Crankshaft of Rs.15,980/-. Besides  the Opp.Parties are directed to pay compensation of Rs.40,000/- (Rupees forty thousand) towards deficiency in service and cost of the litigation of Rs.5,000/-(Rupees five thousand) only to the complainant. The Opp.Parties are jointly and severally liable to comply with the directions within a period of one month from the date of receipt of this order,failing which the entire amount shall carry interest @ 9 % per annum from the date of filing of the case 19.11.2012 till its payment.”

6.            It is revealed from the  Learned counsel for the appellant that learned District Forum has directed to pay  the cost Rs.5,000/-  and Rs.15,980/- towards cost of the Assy. Crankshaft whereas   he has filed the affidavit stating that the OP has received Rs.87,843/- for removal of the defect of the vehicle although he  was not interested  to pay  the money.  So, he submitted to set-aside the  impugned order by allowing the appeal.

7.         Learned counsel for the respondent submitted that  they have received   the entire compensation for Rs.60,980/-.  So, he supports the impugned order.

8.            Considered the submission  of learned counsel for the parties, perused the DFR and impugned order.       

9.            We found that the OP has not filed the appeal but  the complainant has filed the appeal challenging the loss amount awarded by the learned District Forum in view of the affidavit that  he has already paid Rs.87,843/- towards repairing  of the vehicle including  cost of Rs.5,000/-. Therefore, in our opinion    Rs.87,843/- should be payable by the OP. Therefore, we hereby direct to pay Rs.87,843/-  with regard to  cost of the parts  as revised instead of Rs.15,980/- within a period of 45 days from the date of  this order but rest of the order already complied as per the memo filed by the OP. Rest of impugned order will remain unaltered.

                Appeal is disposed of accordingly. No cost.

                Free copy of the order be supplied to the respective parties or they may download same from the confonet  or webtsite of this  Commission to treat same as copy of order received from this Commission.   

               DFR be sent back forthwith.