M R F LIMITED Vs. A BAWA BUGARDHEEN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE opposite party Nos. 1 and 2 in C. O. P. No. 111/2001 on the file of the District Forum, Madurai are the appellants herein.

(2.) THE case of the complainant was as follow : For his cultivation and other agricultural purposes, the complainant owned one Swaraj Tractor. For the replacement of its rear tyres, he purchased two numbers of M. R. F. tyres from O. P. 3, the authorised dealer of MRF tyres. This was done on the basis of the advertisement of the opposite parties and also on the basis of the guarantee given by the first and the third opposite parties. However, the new tractor tyres purchased got damaged. The buttons of both tyres had worn out as also the thread/lugs tip. On 21. 9. 2000 the complainant reported to O. Ps. 1 and 2 about the damage caused to the tyres and also contacted O. P. 3. On the advice of O. P. 1, the technical service engineer one Mr. Charles Staines visited the place of the complainant and checked up the tyres. He submitted his report stating that alternate lugs were worn out not due to manufacturing defect and, therefore, the claim could not be considered. The complainant moved M/s. Marimuthu Associates for inspecting the tyres and to find out the reasons for the damage. They inspected the tyres and gave opinion/report stating that the tyres got worn out only due to manufacturing defect. In the circumstances, the complaint came to be filed for a direction to the opposite parties to refund Rs. 10,800 being the cost of the two tyres, to pay Rs. 50,000 towards the damage for the loss of income and mental agony due to unfair trade practice and to pay cost of the complaint.

(3.) O. P. 1 filed a version which was adopted by O. P. 2. The complainant was not a consumer as the tyre had been used for commercial purpose. The alternate lug-wear would occur on the tyres only if the tyres were operated prolongly in haulage on hard surfaces like roads with insufficient air pressure inside the tyres. The complainant had fixed a trailer with the tractor to carry coconuts from coconut gardens to coconut Mandis (market) by road, which was a hard surface. The purpose thus was different. The defective tyres had to be examined by authorised boards, viz. , Rubber Board, Kottayam, a Government Body. The expert Marimuthu Associates were not qualified to detect the defect on the tyre. There was no manufacturing defect.