CHACKO ZACHARIAH Vs. SIPANI AUTOMOBILES LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WE are constrained to state that the order passed by the State Commission in this case does not contain any discussion of the evidence and it does not satisfy the legal requirements of an order disposing of a complaint. The impugned order merely sets out a summary of pleadings of both parties and thereafter the complaint has been summarily dismissed without any discussion of the materials produced in evidence before the State Commission by either side.

(2.) THE complaint pertains to alleged defects in a car supplied to the complainant by the first Respondent herein through its dealer, the second Respondent. The State Commission referred to the fact that the complainant had listed 14 defects in paragraph 11 of the complaint, but it has not gone on to consider whether any of these defects had been shown as really existing in the car and if so, what relief, if any, should be granted to the complainant.

(3.) IN our opinion the discussion contained in the aforesaid paragraph has not dealt with the real points arising for decision in the case in a satisfactory manner after considering the evidence adduced by both the parties. We are therefore, compelled to remand the case to the State Commission for fresh disposal on the merits in accordance with law in the light of the observations contained in this order. The order under appeal is set aside and the case is remitted to the State Commission. The parties will bear their respective costs.