SUNIL KUMAR CHOPRA Vs. HIMGIRI MOTORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) -Complaint of the appellant seeking compensation on account of having been sold a defective motor cycle was dismissed vide impugned order dated 24.6.2005 by the District Forum on the grounds that all jobs were carried out free of cost during the warranty period and the defects pointed out by the appellant were rectified. The main grievance of the appellant was with regard to the shock absorbers of the motor cycle. According to the appellant shock absorbers were not changed and only mobile oil in the shockers was changed and in spite of changing the mobile oil, the shockers did not function properly.

(2.) THE very fact that the motor cycle was taken to the respondent on 2 -3 occasions and the job card of the motor cycle shows having some defects even during the warranty period and before the expiry of the requisite mileage i.e. 30,000 kms, the shockers during driving also got damaged after hardly plying motor cycle for 12,000 kms. shows that the new motor -cycle was having defects as defined by Section 2(1)(f) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. Defect means - any fault, imperfection or shortcoming in the quality, quantity, potency, purity or standard which is required to be maintained by or under any law for the time being in force (under any contract, express or implied or) as is claimed by the trader in any manner whatsoever in relation to any goods.

(3.) TAKING overall view of the matter, we do not deem it necessary to issue notice to the resspondent and allow the appeal at the outset by awarding compensation of Rs. 5,000 for the mental agony and harassment and Rs. 1,000 towards cost of litigation. The above payment shall be made within one month.