TATA ENGINEERING Vs. SURJIT KAUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order shall decide two revision petitions, one filed by M/s Tata Motors Limited, opposite party No. 2 and another filed by M/s Metro Motors Pvt. Ltd., opposite party No. 1.

(2.) The case of Mrs. Surjeet Kaur is that she had purchased a Tata 1613 TURBO from M/s Metro Motors Pvt. Ltd., opposite party No. 1 on 11.10.2002 for a sum of Rs.6,33,674/-. The said vehicle carried warranty for a period of 18 months from the date of its purchase. Some defects were developed in the vehicle in question. He took the vehicle to opposite party No. 1 on 4.1.2003. The vehicle was repaired and a sum of Rs.15,000/- was charged form the complainant. Thereafter, on 11.10.2003, the engine of the vehicle became dead/stopped, suddenly, in Arohi District Jalon and the driver of the vehicle took the vehicle to Kewal Motors Pvt. Ltd., the authorized dealer of M/s Tata Engineering, Respondent No. 3. The complainant paid an amount of Rs.85,000/- and opposite party No. 3 issued two bills in the sum of Rs.80050/- and Rs.2976/- total being Rs.83026/-. The balance amount was not paid back to the complainant on the plea that the same would be adjusted in the future bills. The above said defects cropped up when the vehicle in question was within a warranty period of 18 months and it had run 81901 kms.

(3.) A complaint was filed before the District Forum which directed the opposite parties 1 to 4 to pay Rs.85,000/- with interest @10% p.a. from 11.10.2003 till realization, Rs.5,000/- as compensation for harassment and mental anguish and Rs.1,000/- towards costs of the proceedings jointly and severally. Being aggrieved, two appeals were preferred by M/s Metro Motors Pvt. Ltd and M/s Tata Engineering separately before the State Commission and the appeals were dismissed.