VASIMALLA JOSEPH Vs. GARAPATI GARAGE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner/Complainant being aggrieved by impugned order dated 03.12.2014 passed by A.P. State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Andhra Pradesh, (for short, 'State Commission') has filed present petition under Section 21(b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986( for short, ' Act'). Along with it, an application seeking condonation of delay of 133 days has been filed.

(2.) Petitioner's case is, that he booked 'Bolero Vehicle' with Respondent No.1/Opposite Party No.1 and paid a sum of Rs.50,000/- towards advance. The total cost of vehicle was Rs.6,97,536/- and petitioner has paid sum of Rs.2,50,000/- towards down payment. After few days, vehicle started giving trouble. At the direction of respondents, petitioner handed over vehicle to them for the purpose of repairs but respondents have failed to deliver the vehicle after repairs. Thus, alleging deficiency on the part of respondents, petitioner filed a consumer complaint before District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Guntur (for short, 'District Forum'), claiming refund of Rs.4,20,000/- and Rs.4,00,000/- towards compensation.

(3.) Respondents No.1 and 2 in their written version, denied the allegations made by the petitioner. It is stated, that on 09.08.2007 vehicle was brought to the garage of respondent no.1 after it had run 8,600 Kms. The vehicle was inspected by Senior Engineer and it was found to be in working condition. Accordingly, petitioner was asked to take delivery of the vehicle but he has chosen not to take delivery of vehicle without any reason. There is no defect in the vehicle.