STANELY JOSEPH Vs. GENERAL MANAGER, BAJAJ AUTO LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant is the complainant and respondents are opposite parties 1 to 3 respectively in OP.A.296/04 on the file of CDRF, Alappuzha. The complaint was filed alleging deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties in their failure to effect repairs free of cost. The complainant alleged manufacturing defect in the vehicle which he purchased from opposite parties 1 to 3. The complainant claimed replacement of the subject vehicle by a brand new vehicle.

(2.) The opposite parties entered appearance and filed written version denying the alleged deficiency in service. They contended that the vehicle was purchased on 15.01.2001 and the complaint herein is filed on 22.10.2004 and that the subject vehicle had covered a distance of 35,000 Kms and so the opposite parties are not liable to replace the subject vehicle or to effect repairs free of cost.

(3.) Before the Forum below Exts.A1 to A5 documents were produced and marked on the side of the complainant. No other evidence was adduced from the side of the parties to the complaints in OP.A-296/04. On an appreciation of the facts, circumstances and evidence on record, the Forum below passed the impugned order dated:20th October 2006 dismissing the complaint. Hence the present appeal.