BHARAT DIESEL Vs. PRATAP SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal against the order dated 25.11.2002 passed by the District Forum, Hardwar whereby the claim of the petitioner was allowed for refund of sum of Rs.2,43,000/- along with other reliefs.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are that the complainant Nos.1 and 2 purchased tractor No. UP 10c/1578 on 18.11.1997 for a sum of Rs.2,43,000/- and the vehicle was insured with complainant No.3. The complainant Nos.1 and 2 had entrusted the tractor to opposite party M/s. Bharat Diesel for servicing on 6.1.1999. After servicing, the mechanic of the opposite party took a trial of the tractor and parked it in the workshop. When the complainant went to bring back the tractor, it was found that the tractor has been stolen from the workshop. The tractor was stolen due to the negligence and lack of security by the opposite party. The complainants have purchased the tractor from the opposite party, therefore, they are entitled to get Rs.2,43,000/- from the opposite party. Since, the tractor was insured with complainant No.3, therefore, the Insurance Company has also been impleaded as complainant.

(3.) The opposite party filed the written statement and alleged that the complainant has filed a false allegation, however, it is admitted that a tractor was purchased by the complainant Nos.1 and 2 from the agency of the opposite party. It is further admitted that the tractor was sent for servicing in the workshop of the opposite party. It is, however, alleged that after the servicing, the complainant Nos.1 and 2 approached the opposite party along with one stranger and told that the person accompanying them shall take the tractor. Complainant Nos.1 and 2 started giving the service charge and the said stranger accompanying the complainant took away the tractor on the instructions of the complainant. The said person did not return and the complainant Nos.1 and 2 lodged the FIR in Police Station. There is no negligence or deficiency in service from the side of the opposite party. The claim can be lodged only with complainant No.3 if the tractor has been stolen or the suit should have been filed in the Civil Court. In the affidavit of Shri Ashok Kumar on behalf of the opposite party, it was however, pleaded that the complainant had received a sum of Rs.1,90,000/- from the complainant No.3 Insurance Company and complainant Nos.1 and 2 have got no right to file a complaint. In the FIR, the opposite party has not been named.