Mr. Justice M.S. Rane, President—Rest of the respondents not present although served.

We are proceeding to dispose of this group of appeals with a common judgment since the order impugned in various appeals is common as also the factual matrix as obtained in the matter herein. Appellants are also common in all these matters.

(For brevity’s sake parties in this judgment in the respective appeals are referred to as appellant who are original O.P. No. 1 in all the complaints as “Manufacturer” and respondent Nos. 1-9 as “complainants” and respondent No. 3 as “Dealer of the Manufacturer”.

2. Manufacturers have filed these appeals challenging the common order dated 19.8.2002 passed by District Form Solapur ordering them to refund the amount paid by the respective complainants towards the price of the vehicle namely auto rickshaws known as Arjun 500 holding that the auto rickshaws sold and supplied to the respective complainants contained manufacturing defects. District Forum has also ordered payment of compensation, cost, etc.

3. It is noticed that all the complainants who purchased the vehicles in question during the similar range of time experienced various defects and faults.

4. Auto Rickshaws were purchased by the respective complainants for running as a public vehicle for the purpose of their self livelihood.

5. However, it is noticed that soon after the purchase and taking possession thereof, the same did not function satisfactorily. There were numerous complaints, which the complainants found in running/plying the auto rickshaws. Matters were reported to the concerned authorities of the Manufacturer as well as Dealer and as nothing fruitfully turned out that complaints were filed.

6. Manufacturer appeared and contested the claims of the complainants highlighting that the auto rickshaws in question were subjected to test and verification by the concerned Government authority namely Vehicle Testing Authority, Vehicle Research Development, Ahmednagar and then only same were sold.

7. In view of this, District Forum referred the matter to Regional Transport Authority, District Solapur, who after inspecting and examining the respective auto rickshaws submitted a report being dated 4.1.2002 and which reports also supported the grievances of the complainants in page No. 18 in particular para 2 District Forum has recorded the defect as noticed and stated by the said Commissioner, which we reproduce as it appears in vernacular...

xxx xxx xxx

xxx xxx xxx

8. No other evidence for that matter, report of expert authority was produced by the Manufacturer to dislodge the said report.

9. That being so, District Forum has considered that defects were of major nature and has made the award.

10. Mr. Kadam, learned Counsel for the Manufacturer appellant submitted that Regional Transport Authority cannot be stated that he possessed necessary expertise in the subject. However, it needs to be stated that on objections were filed by and on behalf of the employers/appellants in the first instance before the District Forum. Apart therefrom the authority to whom the matter was referred by the District Forum happened to be Regional Transport Authority and as such an officer directly concerned with the operation and running of the vehicles including public vehicles, as also the authority of the State Government and, therefore, it is reasonable to presume as also assume that such official possessed require expertise in the matter.

11. For all these reasons, District Forum accepted the said report and has proceeded to make the award and by and large, we find the same reasonable save and except rate of interest as also compensation and cost which appears to be on higher side. In our view, interest awarded @ 12% p.a. is on higher side as also compensation of Rs. 20,000/- and cost of Rs. 5,000/-.

12. In our view, interest @ 7½% p.a. and compensation of Rs. 5,000/- and cost of Rs. 1,000/- will be fair and reasonable in the facts circumstances as obtai