B P MISHRA Vs. PROPRIETOR SREE AUTO SERVICES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this appeal the sole point for decision is whether the direction of the District Forum that the dispute should be decided by the Civil Court is correct or not. The dispute before the District Forum was whether the complainant was entitled to refund of Rs.2,047.83 paid to opposite party No.1, the dealer of a Bajaj Kawasaki motor-cycle, who charged this amount towards cost of the ignitor which turned defective within the period of warranty. It is not disputed that the complainant had purchased the motor-cycle on 23.8.1995 for Rs.33,530/- from opposite party No.3, the dealer of opposite party No.2, the manufacturer. The vehicle carried a warranty for 12 months. Since its ignitor turned defective, this was replaced by opposite party No.1 (though opposite party No.3 was the registered service centre for after-sale service of M/s. Bajaj Auto ). It is claimed that opposite party No.1 took a claim form from the complainant, and assured the complainant that he would pay back the amount after receiving the same from opposite party No.2, the manufacturer.

(2.) Opposite party No.3 i. e. , the seller of the motor-cycle defended the case of the opposite parties by a common written version. The case of the opposite parties is that the ignitor was replaced during the warranty period, and no amount was charged and the claim of the complainant was a false one.

(3.) The District Forum was reluctant to decide the matter holding that it needed elaborate evidence to prove that the complainant in fact paid the amount under Ext.1 and that opposite party No.3 to prove that the spare part purchased under Ext.1 did not relate to the motor-cycle in question and therefore, directed the matter to be decided by the Civil Court.