RAMESH CHANDRA Vs. MARUTI UDYOG LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD.

(2.) BY the order impugned the Forum below has dismissed complaint of appellant claiming replacement of the vehicle "maruti Omni" or refund of its price from respondents manufacturer and the dealer.

(3.) THE vehicle in question was purchased on 25. 4. 2005. There is nothing on record to show that the appellant had any problem until on 19. 7. 2005 when it is said that the engine of the vehicle was ceased and it was required to be brought to respondent's workshop by tochan. Respondent No. 2 the dealer carried out necessary repairs but charged a sum of Rs. 13,000. However, this amount was later on refunded to the appellant as the vehicle on the date of repair was under warranty. As per job card the only complaint reported by the appellant was that of starting trouble. It appears that there was some problem with the electronic controller and which was replaced by the respondent. Simply because a particular part of the vehicle developed some problem, it cannot be said that the vehicle suffered with any manufacturing defect. The part having been replaced by respondent free of cost, no deficiency could be attributed to them in the matter. There is not even iota of evidence to show that after the said repair on 19. 7. 2005 the vehicle suffered with any problem. On the contrary it is seen that the vehicle when produced for repair on 19. 7. 2005 had run 17675 kms. i. e. , with an average of 200 kms. per day. This again goes to show that the appellant had made extensive use of the vehicle. If the vehicle suffered with any manufacturing defect from day one it was not possible for the appellant to make such an extensive use of the vehicle. The problem which developed on 19. 7. 2005 was the sudden one and had been rectified by the respondent.