MARUTI UDYOG LTD Vs. PURAN CHAND WADHWA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE aforesaid appeals arise from the order dated 22. 4. 2003 whereby both the appellants have been directed to pay a consolidated amount of Rs. 25,000 as compensation to be shared by both. Appellant Maruti Udyog is the manufacturer of the vehicle Maruti van purchased by respondent. Appellant Competent Automobiles is a dealer. Both are aggrieved of the order. Maruti Udyog Ltd. is aggrieved of the order that when there was no manufacturing defect in the engine it had been directed to pay the compensation whereas the appellant-Competent Automobiles is aggrieved of the order that there was no deficiency while servicing the vehicle as whenever it was brought defects were rectified. Moreover, the defect was pointed out for the first time after the expiry of the warranty period.

(2.) ADMITTEDLY the vehicle was serviced on 4th July, 2001. Engine oil was replaced by putting 3 litres of oil. The vehicle had run 50,330 kms. by 21st January, 2001. When it was taken to the appellant Competent Motors it had covered 50,864 kms. i. e. , after service and replacement of the engine oil it had only run 534 kms. but no engine oil was found when the vehicle was opened.

(3.) BOTH the appellants could not give any explanation as to how 3 ltrs. engine oil could be consumed when the vehicle had run only 534 kms. The respondent was told that they would be able to tell him the reasons of engine failure only after opening it. The engine was opened by the appellant Competent Auto after charging Rs. 9,015 from the respondent. After opening the engine it was found that there is no oil in the engine and, therefore, it needs replacement. The engine was opened by the engineers of the appellants and they gave in writing that there was no leakage of engine oil from the engine.