BRANCH MANAGER, NEW RAVINDRA TRACTORS Vs. BABU RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both the fora below have given concurrent findings in favour of the petitioner and against the respondents/OPs. Aggrieved by those orders, the petitioner has filed the present revision petition.

(2.) Shri Baburam was the owner of Mahindra Tractor bearing registration No.HR-05-4156. He contacted Branch Manager, New Ravindra Tractors, Link Road, Dyal Singh College Lane, Karnal, OP1 for sale of said Tractor. OP1 assessed the value of the said Tractor in the sum of Rs.85,000/-. In the meantime, the respondent No.1/complainant purchased Farmtrac-30 Tractor from OP1 on 27.01.2005 for a sum of Rs.3,05,000/-. The complainant paid Rs.75,000/- to OP1 in cash and he took loan in the sum of Rs.2,30,000/- from Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd, OP4. The delivery of the said Tractor was given to the complainant by OP1 after getting the same insured with ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company, Karnal, , but OP1 did not issue any sale letter, insurance policy and any other documents for the registration of the said Tractor. The new Tractor purchased by the respondent No.1/complainant was found to be defective. Due to non-supply of requisite documents, the complainant could not ply the Tractor and had to hire another Tractor for his agricultural work, loading and unloading his products which has caused him damages to the tune of Rs.4,50,000/- besides the payment of huge interest to OP-4 with whom the tractor in question was hypothecated. The complainant filed complaint before the District Forum with the following prayers:-

(3.) The OP/petitioner No.1 has contested this case. It was argued by the petitioner's counsel that although, complainant has stated that Rs.85,000/- was not paid to him, yet, he did not make a prayer in this regard. Petitioner has denied all the allegations. Petitioner has stated that old tractor was not sold to it. Counsel for petitioner argued that there is no proof of handing over the old tractor to the petitioner. There is no document to support this contention. He further pointed out that sale documents were handed over to the petitioner immediately and if the Commission so desires, it can provide the duplicate documents at this stage.