Home
Consumer Case Studies
 
Madhya Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Bhopal
 
N K Jain, President; B L Khare and Pramila S Kumar, Members
 
Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd & Ors - Appellants
Versus
Babulal Mewada & Anr - Respondents
 
Appeal No. 1691/01 Decided on 10-03-2005
 
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 - Section 14 - District Forum directing Appellant to replace the tractor manufactured and sold by them to the Complainant and pay Rs 5000/- per year since 1993 as compensation - Appeal - Main defect alleged was excessive consumption of fuel - Such a defect could not be a ground for replacement of tractor - Appellant offering to rectify defects without charge even at this stage - Impugned order was liable to be set aside and directions issued accordingly.

Result -
Appeal allowed accordingly.
 
IMPORTANT POINT

Defect that tractor was consuming excessive fuel could not be a ground for replacement of the vehicle.
 
ORDER
 
1.
By the order impugned passed in case no. 100/2000, the District Forum, Schore has directed Appellants - Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd to replace the tractor manufactured and sold by them to Respondent No.1 - Complainant and also pay to the latter compensation at the rate of Rs. 5,000/- per year from Oct'93 till replacement of the tractor.

2.
We have gone through the evidentiary material on record. Mainly, the defect pointed out in the tractor was excessive consumption of fuel. We are afraid, such a defect could not be a ground for replacement of the tractor in wholesale manner. Counsel for the Appellants submitted that he has instructions from Appellant-company that the company is prepared to repair the tractor free of charge even at this distance of time.

3.
Under section 14 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, the relief which can be granted in such a matter is to direct the manufacturing company to remove the defects and, it is only when defect is not removed, then the order for replacement of the vehicle can be made. Now that the Appellant/Company offers to carry out the necessary repairs and remove the defects free of costs, we deem it just and proper to modify the order accordingly.

4.
As regards the compensation, the direction made by the Forum for payment of compensation @ Rs. 5,000/- p.a. was not justified inasmuch as the tractor could be repaired and put to use during the intervening period. In any case, the Complainant could make alternative arrangement to avoid any loss to him on account of defect in the tractor.

5.
We accordingly allow the appeal, set aside the impugned order but direct the Appellants to carry out necessary repairs and remove all defects free of charge. For this purpose, the tractor shall be made available to the Appellants by Respondent No.1-Complainant within 15 days from the date of communication of the copy of the order. Necessary repairs thereafter be carried out within next 30 days. After repairs, the tractor shall be made available to the Respondent-Complainant through the District Forum. The Forum before handing over the tractor to the complainant shall satisfy itself that all the defects in the tractor have been removed. However, in case it is found that the defects could not be removed, the Appellant shall replace the tractor as ordered by the Forum. We make no order as to costs of this appeal.

Appeal allowed accordingly.