S.S. Sandhawalia, President—Whether the original manufacturer is a necessary party in a complaint against the trader for the supply of defective goods? Whether all defective goods must be referred to an appropriate laboratory for analysis and test under sub- section (1) of Section 13 of the Consumer Protection Act? This is the twin issue which arises for determination in this appeal.

2. As the questions aforesaid are pristinely legal the facts relating thereto may be noticed with relative brevity. Sh. Anil Kumar, complainant/respondent had purchased one Hero Honda Motor Cycle on the 19th of January, 1990 for Rs. 21,777/50 P. from the appellant concern. According to the complainant the said vehicle consumed inordinately excessive mobil-oil and when the appellant was approached in this behalf, they assured that after some time and use the vehicle would work satisfactorily and would not require any excessive mobil oil. The appellant further undertook to change the vehicle in case the said defect does not disappear. However, a later check on 20th March, 1990 disclosed that the engine of the said vehicle was worthless and then a promise was held out by the appellant that new parts s