ORAL

State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission

U.P. Lucknow.

Appeal No. 1263 of 2015

Escorts Limited, 18/4, Mathura Road,

Faridabad (Haryana) 121003                               …Appellant.

Versus

1- Riyazuddin Warsi, adult s/o Munshi Sheikh,

    Village and Post, Mathia Naraipur, District

    Kushi Nagar, Uttar Pradesh.

2- M/s Vishal Tractors, Kasya Road, Chawni,

    Post Padrauna, District Kushi Nagar, U.P..…Respondents.

Present:-

1- Hon’ble Sri Rajendra Singh, Presiding Member.

2- Hon’ble Sri Sushil Kumar, Member.

Sri Sushil Kumar Sharma, Advocate for appellant.

Sri S.K. Srivastava, Advocate for respondent no.1.

Date  1.8.2023

JUDGMENT

Per Sri Sushil Kumar,  Member-   This appeal has been filed against the judgment and order dated 8.5.2015 passed by the Ld. District Commission, Kushi Nagar in complaint case no.139 of 2012, Riyazuddin Warsi vs. M/s Vishal Tractors & anr., whereby the ld. District Forum directed the appellant to replace the tractor with a new tractor and further directed to pay Rs.5,000.00 as compensation payable in favour of the complainant.

          As per allegations of the complaint, the complainant purchased a Farm Track tractor 65 H.P. from the respondent no.2/opposite party no.1, the dealer of the appellant/opposite party no.2. There was a persistent problem in Hydraulic, Gear Box and Plate of the tractor. The complainant further alleged that the tractor was consuming excessive mobil oil, therefore, filed a consumer complaint before the ld. District Forum.

(2)

          The opposite parties denied the allegations and submitted that there was no manufacturing defect in the tractor.

          Upon consideration the evidence, the ld. District Forum concluded that there was persistent problem in Hydraulic, Gear Box and Plate, therefore, directed to replace the tractor.

Being aggrieved by this order of the ld. District Forum, the instant appeal has been filed on the ground that there was no expert opinion regarding the manufacturing defect in the tractor and without any expert opinion and appreciating the material on record, the ld. District Forum directed to replace the tractor which is an illegal order and liable to be set aside.

We have heard the ld. Counsel for both the parties and perused the impugned judgment and record available on the file.

Ld. counsel for the appellant submitted that the manufacturing defect is not proved, therefore, the order to replace the tractor is not sustainable in the eye of law.

Ld. counsel for the  respondent submitted that as per job card report find place at pages 32 to 39, it is crystal clear that the tractor has manufacturing defects and unable to work in the field.

On perusal of these documents mentioned by the ld. counsel for the respondent, it appears that there was problem in Hydraulic, Gear Box and Plate. These parts of the tractor can be changed easily by the appellant and its dealer without changing the whole tractor. Since the defective parts are changeable and repairable, therefore, there was no occasion to direct to replace the tractor in question. Therefore, this appeal

(3)

deserves to be allowed partially upto this extent that the appellants need not to replace the tractor but they are required to replace the above mentioned parts of the tractor as a fresh/new one without any cost and expenses.  

ORDER

The appeal is allowed partially upto this extent that the appellants need not to replace the whole tractor but are directed to change the Hydraulic, Gear Box and Plate of the tractor as a fresh/new one without any cost and expenses within 15 days from receiving of this order. Rest part of the judgment is confirmed.

The respondent no.1/complainant may appear alongwith tractor before the respondent no.2/dealer within 15 days from this judgment and order.

If any amount is deposited by the appellants at the time of filing of this appeal under section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, may be remitted to the concerned District Consumer Commission for satisfying the decree as per rules alongwith accrued interest upto date.

The stenographer is requested to upload this order on the Website of this Commission today itself. 

          Certified copy of this judgment be provided to the parties as per rules.       

          (Sushil Kumar )                         (Rajendra Singh)                             

                 Member                              Presiding Member

Jafri, PA I

Court 2