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

B.C.KANDPAL, D.K.TYAGI, VEENA SHARMA
VENUS AUTO TRADERS – Appellant
Versus
GULFAM – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
M.M. Lamba, Advocate, for the Respondent

ORDER

B.C. Kandpal, President - This is an appeal under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection. Act, 1986 against the order dated 18.10.2010 passed by the District Forum, Haridwar in consumer complaint No. 18 of 2010. By the order impugned, the District Forum has allowed the consumer complaint and directed the appellant-opposite party Nos. 1 and 2 to give new machine to the respondent -complainant after taking back the machine in question and also to pay compensation of Rs. 5,000 to the respondent - complainant, within a period of one month from the date of the order.

2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case as mentioned in the consumer complaint, are that the complainant had purchased an earthmoving equipment/machine from the opposite party No. 1 -Venus Auto Traders for sum of Rs. 17,00,000 approximately. The said machine was hypothecated with the opposite party No. 3-Magma Fincorp Limited, who has not been impleaded as party in the present appeal by the appellants. The said machine was manufactured by the opposite party No. 2 - L&T-Case Equipment Private Limited. The complainant started use of the said machine after deploying a driver and two workers. It was alleged that after a pe

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