BRANCH MANAGER INDIAN BANK Vs. B RAJA REDDY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The above mentioned two appeals have been filed by M/s. Escorts Tractors Ltd. Company and M/s. Shri Laxmi Industrial Company against the same order of District Forum, Baran dated 17.11.1994 passed in Complaint Case No.132 of 1994 whereby the District Forum partly allowed the complaint and directed the opposite parties appellants to pay to the complainant Rs.25,000/- as compensation and to replace the engine of the tractor or pay the cost of the engine.

(2.) The complainants Shri Gajanand and Suraj Mal had purchased a Ford Tractor-3610, 50hp on 30.11.1992 from M/s. Laxmi Industrial Company, Kota who was alleged to be dealer of M/s. Escorts Tractors Limited, Faridabad. Complainant's case was that he had purchased this tractor after taking loan from Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur, Branch Mangrol Distt. Baran and had hypothecated his agricultural land against the loan. The tractor was purchased for a price of Rs.2,41,620.60. According to the complainant, the engine of the tractor was defective and on account of technical defect, it was consuming the engine oil several times excess. The complainant wrote about this to M/s. Escorts Tractors Ltd. The manufacturer had given one year's guarantee and free service coupons. Services were got made but the complaint about excess consumption of engine oil continued. Upon complaint being made to M/s. Laxmi Industrial Company, an engineer came to the complainant's village and tried to remove the defect but the defect continued. The complainant had to incur Rs.12,000/- for sowing his Rabi and Kharif crops by taking another tractor on hire. It was also stated that the complainant had incurred some expenses relating to change of oil filter, engine oil and piston rings and he was entitled to get back these amounts. With these averments, the complainant filed the complaint praying that the engine of the tractor may be got replaced or the complainant may be awarded the cost of the engine with interest @ 24% per annum. He had also claimed Rs.20,000/- as compensation for mental distress and Rs.30,000/- for economic losses.

(3.) Both the opposite parties-appellants filed their version before the District Forum and they denied that there was any defect in the tractor. They had stated that the warranty extended for a period of one year or 100 hours of operation whichever was earlier. The warranty expired on 29.11.1993. The present complaint was filed on 18.12.1993 after the expiry of the warranty period. M/s. Laxmi Industrial Company stated that four free services were duly performed on 18.12.1992, 1.4.1993, 9.7.1993 and 29.9.1993. There was no technical defect in the engine. The complaints made by the complainant were duly attended. It was also stated that the complainant on 29.9.1993 had said that the consumption of oil in the engine was more. Consequently, piston rings and head gasket of the tractor were changed and the amount of sales tax amounting to Rs.107.24 was charged from the complainant. The opposite party No.1 had also sent its mechanic Hanif Khan on 7.12.1993 to the village of the complainant and found that the head gasket needed to be changed. The same was changed, thereafter no complaint was made regarding engine consuming more engine oil. M/s. Escorts Tractors Ltd. , also raised objections that the tractor had been purchased by the complainant for commercial purposes and, therefore, he was not a consumer. It was also stated that in terms of the warranty, costs of air filter, oil filter and mobil oil are not covered. It was also stated that the relationship between the two opposite parties was that of principal to principal and not principal and authorised dealer. It also denied its liability.