BAJAJ TEMPO LTD Vs. AJWANT SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The complainant purchased one Tempo 0X45 tractor from opposite party No.1, M/s. Gill Brothers, on 27-12-1999 for a consideration of Rs.3,10,000/-. The aforesaid tractor had been manufactured by the petitioner-Bajaj Tempo Ltd. which was arrayed as opposite party No.2 in the complaint. It was represented to the complainant that the vehicle carried warranty of 24 months. However, it started giving problems from January 2000 itself. The joints of the mudguard became loose after the tractor had run for only about 35 hours and the engine started giving white smoke. In the month of March/April 2000, at the time of service of the vehicle it was noticed that the paint of the tractor was peeling off on account of pressure of water and its gear box was defective, since the gear could not move freely. CL oil was also found leaking from the engine and the mobile oil also started decreasing by half a liter within 15 hours. It was also noticed that the tractor was of 1998 model and had been changed to 1999 model by replacing the tyres. Alleging deficiency in services the complainant approached the Bhatinda District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (for short, the District Forum), seeking replacement of the tractor or in the alternative refund of the price of the tractor with interest at the rate of 18% per annum. He also sought damages amounting to Rs.1,00,000/-, besides cost of the complaint.

(2.) The complaint was resisted by the manufacturer-M/s. Bajaj Tempo Ltd. as well as by the dealer-M/s. Gill Brothers. The manufacturer-Bajaj Tempo Ltd., however, stated that the aforesaid tractor was a 1998 model tractor having been sold by them on 11-06-1998. It was also stated by them that the vehicle carried warranty only for 12 months and not for 24 months. The manufacturer further alleged that on receipt of the complaint from the purchaser their representative had visited him and the purchaser/complainant was satisfied with the repairs. It was also claimed in the reply of the manufacturer that they had directed the dealer-M/s. Gill Brothers to replace the fender and gear shifting cover and had also sent the aforesaid parts to the dealer but the same were not received by the dealer which had discontinued the dealership in the meanwhile. It was also stated in the reply that the defect in the shifting of the gear was removed by their service engineer, Mr. Jasdeep Singh.

(3.) Vide order dated 31-10-2001, the District Forum directed the opposite parties i.e. the manufacturer as well as the dealer to replace the tractor or refund the price paid by the complainant, along with interest at the rate of 12% per annum. They were also directed to pay Rs.20,000/- as compensation and Rs.1,000/- as cost to the complainant.