SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

N.G.NANDI, G.A.AHUJA
RAMESHBHAI M. PATEL – Appellant
Versus
DAIMLER CHRYSLTER INDIA PVT. LTD. – Respondent


ORDER

G.A. Ahuja, Member - Heard Mr. P.A. Vakil learned Advocate for the complainant, Mr. Pandit learned Advocate for the Opponent No. 1 and Mr. Ketan Kamdar learned Advocate for the Opponent No. 2.

Complainant had filed this complaint with prayer to direct the respondent to replace the complainant's car with a new Mercedes Benze of the same class which he purchased form the Opponent No. 2. In the alternate with a prayer to direct the respondents to pay to the complainant an amount of Rs. 20,82, 421 with interest @ 18% per annum from the date of accident i.e. from 28.5.2003 till realization, and to direct the respondent to pay to the complainant an amount of Rs. 70,00,000 under the head of "mental, physical and financial hardship, trauma, stress and inconvenience, deprivation of the enjoyment of his vehicle on account of the defective goods supplied and deficient services rendered by the respondents" with cost.

2. Facts leading to the filing of the present complaint in short are as under:

That the complainant purchased Mercedes Benze (Model E 230 C 1998 from the opponent No. 2 on payment of Rs. 29,46,570 vide cheque No. 424918 dated 10.11.1998. Opponent No. 1 is a manufacturer of the a

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top