VIJAY KUMAR MISHRA Vs. ROYAL AUTOMOBILES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a Revision Petition against the appellate order passed on the petitioners appeal against the order of the District Forum in execution. The case of the complainant is that the judgment debtor was required to repair the jeep of the petitioner. On evidence the District Forum discovered that in compliance with the order of the executing Forum the respondent had carried out the repair to the vehicle on 31st March, 2000. Not only that, after the completion of repair the complainant-petitioner had to give a letter of satisfaction. As per his letter of 14th April, 2000, they collected the vehicle after the repairs and had promised to send the satisfaction letter dated 30 days from 14th April, 2000. But, he did not do so, and, in fact, nothing was heard from him. It was only on 30th April, 2001, that the petitioner again complained about the vehicle which revealed certain flaws apart from certain cracks which had appeared.

(2.) The District Forum after recording evidence came to the conclusion that such cracks had developed due to improper maintenance on the part of the complainant, and not due to deficient repair. On perusal of the record, State Commission concurred with the District Forum.

(3.) We agree with the Fora below that all that was required to be done under the orders of the District Forum was done and that the respondents are no longer liable to go on repairing the vehicle which was sold in 1997 for all times to come. We find no merit in the revision petition. It is accordingly dismissed. R.P. dismissed.