LAWS(MHCDRC)-2009-10-41

AHER AUTO PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. INDRAPAL SINGH

Decided On October 01, 2009
Aher Auto Private Limited, Regd. Office: Kalyan Appellant
V/S
INDRAPAL SINGH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved by the judgment/award passed by Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, District Thane, in Consumer Complaint No.543/2007 decided on 15.11.2008, where by allowing the complaint, the forum below directed the Opposite Party Nos.1 and 2 to take back old vehicle sold to the Complainant and to give him new Hero Honda Motor Cycle without any defects to the Complainant without charging anything from him. The Forum below also directed the Opposite Parties to pay R.T.O. taxes and octroi for the new vehicle to be given to the Complainant. Forum below also directed the Opposite Parties to pay Rs.5,000/- for mental agony and Rs.5,000/- towards costs of the complaint, the original Opposite Party No.1 Aher Auto Pvt. Ltd., has filed this appeal.

(2.) The facts to the extent appeal may be stated as under:

(3.) Opposite Parties filed written statement and admitted that they sold the vehicle to the Complainant, but they pleaded that Complainant was knowing that it was the model of 2005. Since it was old model, they had given trade discount of Rs.2,665/- to the Complainant. While giving delivery of the vehicle the Hero Honda bike was in proper order, there were no defects, but, since Complainant handled the vehicle roughly some defects developed for which Opposite Parties are not responsible. Opposite Parties pleaded that they had never assured to the Complainant to give replacement of the vehicle by giving him new model. Opposite Party No.1 also pleaded that it was not concerned with the entries made in the insurance policy issued by Insurance Company. Opposite Party No.2 pleaded that complaint was absolutely false, they had not tried to cheat the Complainant in any manner. They had sold vehicle of 2005 model and Complainant purchased the same with his open eyes and he availed the trade discount and when the possession of the vehicle was given to the Complainant it was in proper order and in roadworthy condition and Complainant was satisfied with roadworthiness of the said vehicle. Therefore, they prayed for dismissal of the complaint with costs.