(1.) Petitioner was the complainant before the District Forum, where he had filed a complaint alleging deficiency in service on the part of the respondents.
(2.) Very briefly stated the facts leading to filing the complaint were that the petitioner purchased a tractor manufactured by the first respondent. It is the case of the petitioner that the rear -wheel tyres of the tractor got badly weared. The matter was reported to the third respondent. The matter was pursued with the respondent, but when the petitioner was not getting any satisfactory response from them, a complaint was filed before the District Forum, who after hearing the parties and after perusal of material on record including the expert evidence, dismissed the complaint. Aggrieved by this order, an appeal was filed before the State Commission, who after due consideration also dismissed the appeal, hence this revision petition before this Commission.
(3.) I heard the Learned Counsel for the petitioner at some length and also perused the material on record. I have carefully gone through the inspection report carried out by the Southern Region Farm Machinery Training & Testing Institute, District Anantapur, Andhra Pradesh. The main defects noticed in rear wheels of the tractor are as follows: