ARUN MAHESWARI Vs. KRISHNA TRADERS & ANR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition has been filed by petitioner against order dated 30.11.2010 passed by State Commission in FA No. 281 of 2010- Arun Maheshwari Vs. M/s. Krishna Traders & Anr.; by which appeal was dismissed.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that complainant/petitioner purchased battery operated two wheeler from opposite party No. 1/ respondent No. 1 on 23.2.2008 which was manufactured by opposite party No. 2/ respondent No. 2, on payment of Rs. 37,842/-. At the time of taking delivery, opposite party No. 1 assured free replacement of heavy shock absorber but opposite party No. 1 demanded money for replacement. Complainant contacted opposite party No. 2 and came to know that three items were to be replaced free of cost. It was further alleged that vehicle was giving less mileage against promised mileage. Vehicle met with an accident on 29.3.2008 resulting in damage to chassis and other parts but vehicle was not repaired by opposite party and complainant got it repaired after paying charges. It was further submitted that complainant paid registration charges but still vehicle has not been registered. Alleging deficiency on the part of opposite party, complainant filed complaint before District Forum. Opposite party No. 1 resisted complaint, admitted sale of vehicle but denied any assurance for replacement of shock absorber. It was further submitted that warranty book was supplied to complainant but denied allegation of less mileage. He admitted replacement of damaged parts at cost of Rs. 15,247/- which were paid by complainant without protest. It was further pleaded that battery and rear shocker controller converter were replaced without charges even after expiry of warranty period and further submitted that registration charges are still lying with opposite party which he tried to refund but complainant did not accept and prayed for dismissal of complaint. Learned District Forum after hearing both the parties dismissed complaint. Appeal filed by complainant was dismissed by Learned State Commission vide impugned order against which this revision petition has been filed.

(3.) Heard Learned Counsel for the parties finally at admission stage and perused record.