P.D. Shenoy, Member—The factual matrix of case in brief is as follows:

2. On 18.6.2004 the complainant Mr. Shirgaonkar purchased a Tata Sumo manufactured by M/s Tata Motors Ltd.(Original OP 2) from its authorized dealer M/s Pandit Automotive Ltd., Tilak Road, Pune(Original OP 1). The complainant found a number of defects in the vehicle, hence he took the vehicle to OP 1 who tried to remove the defects but not to the satisfaction of the complainant. He was convinced that there were manufacturing defects accordingly, he handed over the vehicle to custody of OP1 on 12.7.2004 since then it is lying there.

3. Later on the complainant filed a complaint before the District Forum, Pune, which was resisted by the OPs stating that defective parts of the vehicles have been replaced and the vehicle was properly repaired. Though the vehicle was kept ready for delivery, complainant did not take the same and insisted on its replacement.

4. The District Forum after hearing the parties and going through the records of the case allowed the complaint by its order dated 2.9.2005 and directed the OPs jointly and severally to replace the vehicle with a brand new vehicle within six weeks from the dat