JAYALAKSHMI Vs. SOMASHEKAR & 2 ORS; MANAGING DIRECTOR, SAS MOTORS LTD; S A S MOTORS LTD; GOVINDAIAH & ANR; DYAVAMMA & 2 ORS; VASANTHAKUMAR; PUTTASWAMY & ANR; RAJEGOWDA & 2 ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The complainants / respondents purchased tractors from the petitioner. The said tractors had been manufactured by respondent SAS Motors Ltd. Alleging manufacturing defect in the aforesaid tractors, the complainants approached the concerned District Forum by way of separate consumer complaints, impleading the petitioner as well as the manufacturer of the tractors as parties to the consumer complaints. The District Forum held that there was no manufacturing defects in the tractors but directed the petitioner to repair the vehicles in its service garage or get the same repaired in a reputed service centre. Compensation was also awarded in favour of the complainants.

(2.) Since the order passed by the District Forum in consumer complaints was not challenged by any party, it became final and binding on them.

(3.) Alleging that the petitioner had not complied with the order passed by the District Forum, the complainants approached the concerned District Forum by way of execution petitions. In the said execution petitions, the District Forum directed that the tractors be examined. In compliance of the said directions, the tractors were examined by Motor Vehicle Inspector, who submitted his report, with respect to the said tractors. It was reported by him that the tractors had cultivated land upto 2-3' depth, making some scratch marks on the land but thereafter they did not work on account of inadequate power of the tractor engines. When he tried to cultivate the land on a peak, it could not be cultivated deeply and after the tractors had made some scratch marks the radiator started boiling. He concluded that the tractors were for doing small agricultural activities but not fit for use of agricultural activities and cultivation.