BAJAJ AUTO LIMITED Vs. LAWRENCE MARIO BRAGANZA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS order will dispose of judgment and order dated 20.2.2008 of the District Forum, North Goa in consumer dispute No. 34/04. The Respondent No. X herein is the original complainant, and the appellant Nos. 1,2, and 3 herein, are opposite party Nos. 1,2 and 3 before the District Forum. For sake of convenience, they will be named as such in this order.

(2.) IT is the case of the complainant that he had purchased a Bajaj Pulsar Motor Cycle for Rs. 59,567 on 1.8.2002 from opposite party No.2. Opposite Party No. 1 is the manufacturer and opposite party No. 3 is the Service Centre at Panaji of opposite party No. 1. It is the case of the complainant that immediately after the purchase of the vehicle, it started giving trouble, i.e. when he released the first gear, the rear wheel, the chain and the sprocket started vibrating. Even after repairs and replacement, there was no improvement. The engine cover was opened many times and there was a lot of vibration on the bike. The clutch plate was replaced four times and repaired three times. The pressure plate and clutch assembly was also replaced. The clutch assembly was sent from Bangalore by one Shri Nabu John but it was of no use. The complainant had produced a copy of the Service Chart indicating such repairs.

(3.) THE complainant stated that the vehicle was under warranty which expired on 1.8.2004. He also sent legal notice dated 7.3.2003, but there was no reply from the opposite parties. The Complainant stated that he was entitled for compensation of Rs. 1,00,000 for mental agony or in the alternative, for replacement of the vehicle, or the refund of the total purchase price with interest at 18% p.a. from 1.8.2002 till realization of the amount.