ASHOK LEYLAND LTD. Vs. SWORNAPRAVASAHOO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal under Sec. 19 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (in short, 'the Act') is directed against the order dtd. 31/3/2017 of the Odisha State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Cuttack (in short, 'the State Commission') in Complaint no. 61 of 2011, allowing the appeal in part and directing the appellant to:

(2.) The facts of the case in brief are that the appellant, which is an automobile manufacturing company, sold a truck 'Ashok Leyland Cargo 909' to the respondent on 16/1/1997. The respondent after running the vehicle for 484 kms reported various manufacturing defects and approached respondent nos.2 and 3 on several occasions to rectify the problems. Respondent no.1 approached the appellant on 24/3/1997 for replacement of the vehicle within 15 days and thereafter approached the Chairman, MRTP Commission in the matter. On 9/6/1997 the complaint case no.2177 dtd. 9/4/1997 before the MRTP Commission, New Delhi, was withdrawn on the ground that the matter had been settled amicably. Thereafter, respondent no.1 continued to approach respondent no.2 pointing out various defects in the vehicle and demanded replacement or refund of the cost with interest @ 17.60%. Complaint no.83 of 1998 was filed before the State Commission on 30/12/1998 alleging deficiency in service within the warranty period and manufacturing defects. However, this complaint was permitted to be withdrawn on the ground that CA no.395 of 1999 was pending before the MRTP Commission on the same matter. Following the establishment of the Competition Appellate Tribunal, CA no. 395 of 1999 was transferred from the MRTP Commission to the Appellate Tribunal which held, vide order dtd. 3/5/2011, that the compensation application was not maintainable as per the order in CA no.108 of 2005 dtd. 29/3/2011. This order permitted the parties to apply to the State Commission by addressing the issue of limitation and accordingly Complaint no. 61 of 2011 was filed before the State Commission.

(3.) Prayer of the respondent before the State Commission was to replace the vehicle sold to her with a new defect free vehicle in exchange or, in the alternative, to pay the claim amount of Rs.24,16,554.76. This complaint was decided on contest and the State Commission held as follows: